Skip to main content

Full text of "Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 



So. 1 .— TiTra. No. 2.— HaDRiAN. No. 3.--Con; 






R.E., K.C.B., K.C.M.G., F.R.S., D.C.L., LL.D. 



Published by 

38, Conduit Street, London, W. 


Ail rights rcscii'ed. 






Introductory Note vii 

Golgotha— The Name 1 


Was there a Public Place of Execution at Jerusalem in 

THE Time op Christ? 18 


The Topography op Jerusalem at the Time op tub 

Crucifixion 24 

The Position op Golgotha— The Bible Narrative 30 


On the Position of certain Places mentioned in the 
Bible Narrative — Gethssmane — The House op Caiaphas 
— The Hall of THE Sanhedrin— The Pr^torium ... 37 


The Arguments in Favour of the Authenticity of the 

Traditional Sites 45 


The History op Jerusalem, a.d. 33-326 49 

Note on the Coins of iElia 69 


The Attitude of the Early Christians towards Golgotha 

and the Tomb *J'2 




The Identification of the Traditional Sites with 

Golgotha and the Tomb in the Eeign of Constantine 80 

Theories with regard to the Positions of Golgotha and 

the XOmB ••< ••• ••• ... ... ».. ••• ,,. lUo 


The Ajtcient Walls OF Jerusalem 121 

1. General Remarks. 

2. Tlie City Walls in a.d. 70. 

3. The Walls of the Eoman Camp, a.d. 70-132. 

4. The Walls of ^lia Capitolina. 



Appendix I. — List of Authors and Authorities referred to ... 149 

A ppendix II. — List of Important Dates 1 56 

1. Historical Dates. 

2. Dates of Early Authors arranged Chronologically. 

Appendix III. — Evidence of Early Cliristian Writers with regard 

to the Origin of the Place-name Golgotha 159 

Appendix IV. — Extracts from Greek and Latin Writers relating 

to the History of Jerusalem, A.D. 33-326 167 

Appendix V. — Extracts from Greek and Latin Writers descrip- 
tive of the Circumstances under which the Holy Sepulchre 
was brought to Light 179 

Appendix VI. — Eeferences to the Tomb and Cross by Eusebius 

clIlU vy Vx xJ. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Xt// 

Appendix VII. — General Gordon's Views with regard to the 

Position of Golgotha 199 

Appendix VI 11. — Dr. Eobinson's Views with regard to the 

Position of the Third Wall of Jerusalem 203 



Coins of the Boman Emperoi-s, Titus, Hadrian, and Constantino 


Portrait of the late Major-General Sir C. W. Wilson, K.C.B. ... vii 
Plate I. — Mosaic in the Apse of the Basilica of S. Pudenziana, 

Xm/LU" •.■ ••■ ..■ ... ••• ••• .«• ••• 1<J 

Plate 11. — Hillside with cultivated terraces, ending in scarps 

with rock-hewn tombs 20) 

Plate III. — Tombs with terrace gardens in front. No. 1. Near 
the "Tombs of the Judges,*' Jerusalem. No. 2. "In the 
Valley of Hinnom " 36 

Plate IV. — No. 1. The Mount of Olives as seen from Jerusalem ; 
the Garden of Gethsemane in foreground. No. 2. David's 
Tower ; probably the site of the Prwtorium 38 

Plate V. — No. 1. The Barracks at the north-west comer of the 
Haram ; probably the site of Antonia. No. 2. The " Ecce 
Homo " arch ; a relic of Hadrian's city of ^Elia 42 

Plate VI. — Coins of Roman Emperors. No. 1. Hadrian. No. 2. 
Diadumenian. No. 3. Hadrian. No. 4. Antoninus Pius. 
No. 5. M. Aurelius and Verus 70 

Plate VII. — Coins of Home and Judaea. No. 1. Coin of First 
Revolt. No. 2. Coin in which tax was paid. No. 3. Coin 
of Second Revolt. No. 4 Coin of Second Revolt. No. 5. 
Medal of Vespasian. No. 6. Coin of Domitian 71 

Plate VIIL— El Edhemlyeh ; " Jeremiah's Grotto " and " Skull 

TTiii " n ^» 

* ^ 1 1 I ••• ••■ ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• XxC/ 

Plate IX. — Part of the Mosaic of Madeba, showing the walls, 

gates, and main streets of Jerusalem 118 



Figure 1. — Tombstone from Gaza 16 

Figure 2.— Coin of Pontius Pilate, a.d. 32-33 49 

Figure 3. — ^Coin of the Emperor Hadrian, founder of the colony 

\fi- .ifXllJ Idl ••• ••■ »■« ... (•« ^ , t ,,, ,,, OL 

Figure 4. — Coin of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, with turreted 

bust of the city 63 

Figure 6. — Inscription found at east end of Church of Holy 

lO\?E'LlX01X£ v«*« ••• ••• vvt ••• ••• ••• ••• vlf 

Figure 6. — Plan of ground near "Jeremiah's Grotto" 108 

Figure 7. — Section through " Jeremiah's Grotto " and the 

v^UcvX X Xt^H ••• • • m ••• ••• ••• ••• •■• ••• X.X \J 

» -1 • • 

Figure 8. — Plan of the Ancient Walls on the northern side of 

v exUsaiein ••• ••• ••• ••■ •«• ... ... (., x ^u 

Figure 9. — Plan showing alternative lines of the second wall ... 131 

Figure 10. — Camp of the Tenth Legion at Jerusalem 144 

Figure 11. — General Gordon's sketch of "Skull Hill" and 

cnurcues *.■ •■■ ..* ••• ... ••• ... ... ^uv/ 

Figure 12. — Sketch by General Gordon, illustrative of the 

relative position of sites at Jerusalem 201 

Plan of Jerusalem , At end of volume 

bi/ jii-'t'i-'. M„«ii ,:«,! r,.^ 

MA.T(m-aESKB.T. Sm CiURiEa W. Wilsom, K,C,B., K-.C.5r.O.. Fits. 



When the late Major-Gencriil Sir Charles Wilson was engaged 
upon the Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem in 1864-5, he made a 
plan of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the buildings 
surrounding it, which was published on the scale of ^.^y. His 
attention was naturally attracted to the (question of the validity 
of the traditional sites of the Holy Sepulchre and of Golgotha, 
and he collected, in the years that have elapsed since the date of 
the survey, a mass of information bearing upon this very 
interesting subject. Much of this information was included in a 
series of articles entitled " Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre," 
which Sir C. Wilson contributed to the Quarferlf/ StatonnU of the 
Palestine Exploration Fund in the years 1902-4. These articles 
he decided to republish in book form, so as to render them more 
easily accessible to those who were interested in the study of the 
question. He recast and extended the original papers, thus 
adding much to their value, and had commenced printing the 
book when attacked by the illness which terminated in his much 
to be lamented death. 

With the permission of Lady Wilson, the Executive Com- 
mittee of the Palestine Exploration Fund decided to complete 
the publication of the work. It is possible that, had Sir 
C. Wilson lived, he might have added to it further, but fortu- 
nately the MS. was nearly complete, and notes that he had 
prepared enabled it to be put in the form in which it is believed 
he intended to publish it. The Committee feel little doubt that 
the book will prove of great value to students of the question, 
and the numerous references will be of assistance to those who 
wish to consult the original authorities. 

' C. M. Watson. 



Golgotha — The Name. 

Christ, according to St. Matthew, was led out for crucifixion to 
" a place called Golgotha, that is to say, the place of a skull " ; ^ 
Mark has, " the place Golgotha, which is being interpreted, the 
place of a skull " ; and John, " the place called the place of a 
skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha"; Luke, a Greek, 
writing in Greek for Gentile readers, has simply "the place 
which is called the skull." ^ 

It is clear from the above that Christ was crucified at a 
known spot, with a distinctive name — " the skull," or " the place 
of a skull." What was the origin of this curious place-name 1 

Golgotha^ is the Greek transliteration (the second I being 
dropped out) of the Aramaic Gulg^Ua which corresponds to the 
Hebrew Gvlgdleth, The Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word 
is Kpaviov (kranion\ the Latin, ccdvaria, and the English, skull. 
The Bible gives no explanation of the origin of the word, and 
we have to trust to tradition and to the speculations of those 
Christian writers who have referred to the subject.* In 

^ All quotations from the Bible are, unless otherwise stated, from the 
Revised Version. 

2 Els r6nrov \ty6fi(vov ro\yo6a os iarri \ey6yLtvos Kpaviov r6nro5 (Matt, xxyii, 
33) ; ^iri ToXyoOa rSrKOVf o iari fic$cpfi7iPcv6fi€voyf Kpaviov tStkos (Mark xy, 22) ; 
«ij rbv \ey6fitvoy Kpaylov rorop 8 \kyerai 'Efipa'Iffri FoKyoda (John xix, 17) ; 
^irt rbv tAttov rbv Ka\oiffjitvov Kpaviov (Luke xxiii, 33). 

' According to Nestle {Zeitschrift des Deutachen Faldstina VereinSf 
xxTiii, p. 40) the correct form is probably Q-agoltha. 

* The place-name " Golgotha " is not found, apparently, in the writings 
of Clement, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, or in those of any G-reek 
writer before the time of Origen (a.d. 185-253). 


considering the latter it is necessary to bear in mind the relative 
opportunities possessed by Greek and Latin authorities for 
acquiring local information. Some of the Greek writers were 
born in Palestine, whilst others lived in the country for many 
years in close contact with the people. Several of the Latin 
writers had no local knowledge, and, excepting Jerome and 
Kufinus, few of them resided for any length of time in Palestine. 
Allowance must also be made for those shades of thought and 
feeling which distinguished the Greek from the Koman, and for 
the differences between eastern and western tendencies and 

There are three theories with regard to the origin of the 
place name : — 

1. That it was derived from a tradition that the skull of Adavt 
vxis preserved in tlie place, — The earliest known Greek writer to 
connect Adam with Golgotha is Origen (a.d. 185-253), who lived 
in Palestine for 20 years ^ (a.d. 233-253), was a personal friend of 
the Bishop of Jerusalem, and a sound Hebrew scholar. Origen 
states 2 that there was a Hebrew tradition to the effect that Adam 
was buried at the Place of a Skull. Athanasius (a.d. 296-373) 
says that Christ did not suffer " in any other place, but in the 
Place of a Skull which the Hebrew teachers declare was Adam's 
sepulchre."^ Epiphanius (a.d. 312-403), who was of Hebrew 
origin, writes that "Our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified at 
Golgotha, in no other place than that in which Adam lay 
buried."* Basil of Csesarea (a.d. 329-379), giving the Adam 
legend in a fuller form, states that it was "a prevalent belief 
preserved in the Church by an unwritten tradition," ^ that Adam 
was buried at the Place of a Skull, where Christ was crucified. 

* Origen had previously yisited Palestine in a.d. 215 and circa k.j>. 220. 
2 Appendix III., 1. 

^ Appendix III., 2. 
'* Appendix III., 3. 

* Appendix III., 4. Theophylact, Bishop of Bulgaria, circa a.d. 1070, 
describes the belief as haying come down " from the Holy Fathers" {Com- 
mentary on St. Mark, xv ; Migne, Patrologia GraecOf cxxiii, col. 668), and 
as " an ecclesiastical tradition " (Commentary on St. John, xix, ibid., cxxiy, 
col. 273). 

Chrysostom (a.d. 347-407) connects ^ Adam's death and burial 
with the Place of a Skull, and so do Nonnus Panopolitanus - 
{circa A.D. 385-440), and Basil of Seleucia (Bishop A.D. 448), who 
calls it a tradition of the Jews.*^ The tradition is not men- 
tioned by Eusebius (a.d. 260-339), by Cyril of Jerusalem (circa 
A.D. 315-386), or by the historians of the fifth century - 
Theodoret, Sozomen, and Socrates. 

The references to the Adam legend in Latin writers are 
few. It appears in some verses doubtfully ascribed to Tertullian 
(a.d. 155-230), and appended to his genuine works ; * and in a 
letter ^ from Cyprian (Bishop a.d. 248) to Pope Cornelius, which 
is not accepted as genuine by Migne. Ambrose (circa a.d. 340-397) 
writes : — " There (at Golgotha) was the sepulchre of Adam," and 
ascribes a Hebrew origin to the tradition.^ Jerome (a.d. 346-420) 
gives the legend without comment in the letter of Paula and 
£ustochium to Marcella, but elsewhere he calls it a "stage 
miracle,*' and proposes a different explanation of the word 
Golgotha.'' There is a notice of it in the (spurious) sixth sermon 
of Augustine * (a.d. 354-430), but none in the history of Rufinus 
(A.D. 345-410). After the fifth century the Adam legend 
appears to have been greatly enlarged, if we may judge from 
the character it assumes in the writings of the Assyrian Bishop, 
Moses Bar Cepha^ (tenth century), and of the Patriarch of 
Alexandria, Said ibn Batrak, or Eutychius ^® (a.d. 876-939). It 
appears in its most complete form in the Ethiopic " Book of 
Adam," ^^ which bears evident traces of having reached Abyssinia 

^ Appendix III., 5. ^ Appendix III., 6. 

' Appendix III., 7. See also Anastasius Sinaita {d. a.d. 599), Hexx- 
meron, lib, vii ; preserred in Latin only (Migne, Patrologia Grasca^ Ixxxix, 
cols. 943-945). 

* Appendix III., 8. 

* Appendix III., 9, L 

* Appendix III., 10, i, ii. 

7 Appendix III., 11, i, ii, iii. 

8 Appendix III., 12. 

* Appendix III., 13. 
10 Appendix III., 14. 

** A G-erman translation was published in a.d. 1853 by Dillmann {D(f.^ 
Christliche Adamhuch des Morgenlandes, in Ewald's Jahrhiicher der 

A 2 

vid Egypt. This curious development is purely Oriental and is 
found in the works of no Western writer. 

An essential part of the legend appears to have been that the 
tomb of Adam was in the centre or navel of the earth ; and this 
position is assigned to Golgotha by writers who do not connect 
that place with Adam. Thus Cyril of Jerusalem calls it "the 
very centre of the earth " ;^ Didymus Alexandrinus (a.d. 309-394), 
" the centre of the universe '' ; - Victorinus of Poitiers, " the 
middle of the whole earth " ; -^ Sophronius (circa A.D. 564-637), 
" the navel of the earth " ; ^ and Andreas Cretensis (Archbishop 
of Crete, a.d. 675), " the middle of the earth." ^ 

It may now be asked whether this Christian tradition, or any 
part of it, is of Hebrew origin ? In the period preceding the 
Christian era, when the plain narrative of the Bible had become 
too simple for the tastes of the age, the lives of the three great 
heroes, Adam, Abraham, and Moses, were " elaborately embel- 
lished with fictitious legends." The Christians, when they 
accepted these Jewish legends, elaborated them with great zeal, 
and it is now often " impossible to distinguish with any certainty 
between what is Jewish and what is Christian." Five works on 
the life of Adam have come down to us, and, although they are 
unquestionably of Christian origin, they are no less certainly 
based upon Jewish traditions of greater antiquity. A " Book of 
Adam," which has unfortunately been lost, is referred to in the 
Talmud.® But Adam is directly connected with Jerusalem by 
the celebrated Jewish Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, or Maimonides 

Bihlischen Wissenschafty vol. v; Gottingen, a.d. 1853), and an English 
one. The Book of Adam and Eve^ by Malan, in 1882. 

* Catechetical LeclnreSf xiii, 28 ; Migne, Patrologia Q7*aeca, xxxiii, col. 805. 
2 De Trinitate^ lib. 1 ; Migne, Patrologia Graecay xxxix, coh. 323-326. 

2 Appendix III., 9, ii. 

* Anacreontica, xx, line 29; Migne, Patrologia Qraeca^ Ixxxvii, 
col. 3,320 J Oratio v. Be Festo Sancti Crucis, ibid., col. 3,313. 

^ In Exaltatione Sancti Crucis, II. (Oratio xi) ; Migne, Patrologia Grxca, 
xciii, col. 1,044. See also Jerome, in JSzek. r, 5 ; Migne, Patrologia Latina, 
XXV, col. 52; Hilarius, in Matt, xxxiii; Migne, Patrologia Latina, ix, 
cols. 1,073-1,074. 

^ The Apostolic Constitutions (vi, 16) mention an apocryphal Book of 
Adam (Migne, Patrologia Gneca, i, col. 953) ; and Epiphanius (Adversus 

(a.d. 1131-1204), who states ^ that the altar of the Temple stocnl 
on the spot whence the dust was taken from which Adam was 
formed, and upon which Adam, after his creation, Iniilt an altar 
and offered his first sacrifice. On the same spot Xoah sacrificed 
on leaving the Ark, and Abraham erected the altar upon which 
he laid Isaac. An appropriate termination of the legend would 
have been the burial of Adam's bofly at Jenisalem in the ground 
from which it had been formed. But all Hebrew writers of 
post-Christian times assert that Adam was buried at Hebron, or, 
in the words of the " Jewish Encyclopaedia " 2 " jn the neighbour- 
hood of Paradise, the exact spot being Hebron, near Jerusalem, 
for the site of the altar in the Temple, whence the dust of Adam 
was taken, is the gate to Paradise." Jerome, from a wrong 
reading of Joshua xiv, 15,'^ states that Adam was buried at 
Hebron, but he does not support his opinion by reference to any 
Hebrew tradition, as he probably would have done if the 
existence of such a tradition had been known to him.* The 
belief that Jerusalem was the centre of the earth is of ancient 
date, and appears to have been derived from Ezekiel.^ Thus 
Josephus says : ** The city of Jerusalem is situated in the very 
middle, on which account some have, with sagacity enough, called 
that city the navel of the country " '*> ; and the Eabbis represent 

Hxresix^ xxvi, 8, Migne, Patrologia Oneca^ xli, col. 341) notices a Gnostic 
work, " The Apocaljpse of Adam." For an account of the lost legendary 
works of Jewish literature, and of the Christian hooks of Adam, see Schiirer, 
History of the Jewish People ^ Div. II., vol. iii, pp. 146-148, of £nglis]i 
translation, in Clarke's Foreign Theological Library. See also Smith and 
Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography y and Hastings, Dictionary of the 
Bible, Art. *' Books of Adam " ; Encyclopedia Biblica, Art. ** Apocrypha," 
§ 10; and Jewish Encyclopaedia, Art. " Adam, Book of." 

» Appendix III., 15. 2 yoj. i^ p. igo, Art. " Adam." 

^ See Appendix III., 11, iii, and note. 

** According to Johannes Nicolai, ** some assert that Adam was buried in 
two places, first at Eirjath Arba and then in Mount Calvary {De Sepulchris 
JSehraeorum, p. 118). 

* ** This is Jerusalem : I hare set her in the midst of the nations, and 
countries are round about her" (Ezek. v, 5). '* The people that are gathered 
out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and poods that dwell in the 
middle (Heb. navel) of the earth " (Ezek. xxxviii, 12). 

* Josephus, Wars, iii, 3, § 5. 

the ** stone of foundation," or aven slieteyah, in the Temple as the 
centre or nucleus from which the world was founded.^ 

It would thus appear certain that Hebrew tradition connected 
the first man with Jerusalem, the centre of the earth ; and that, 
more than a hundred years before Constantine built his churches 
in the Holy City,^ there was a tradition current amongst the 
Christians of Palestine that Adam had been buried at Golgotha, 
the centre of the earth. To this tradition a Hebrew origin was 
ascribed by Origen and Athanasius, and, although we cannot 
trace it back to Jewish sources, it is extremely probable that the 
legend was of pre-Christian date. It may perhaps be assigned 
to the period, alluded to above, when Jewish thought was so 
much engaged with the past. The tradition, as given by Origeri, 
does not seem to be one that the early Jewish or Gentile 
Christians would be likely to invent, and no Jew would have 
originated it after the Crucifixion. On the other hand, if the 
tradition was of pre-Christian date, it is quite conceivable that 
the Babbis, writing after the Crucifixion and the destruction of 
Jerusalem, may have been led, by motives that need not be 
specified, to transfer Adam's last resting-place to Hebron, where 
the Patriarchs were buried. However absurd the Adam 
tradition ^ may appear to us at the present day, there can be no 
doubt with regard to its general acceptance, in its simplest form, 
by the Christian writers of the first six centuries.* Cyril of 
Jerusalem, who says** that Golgotha was so named because 
Christ, the Head of the Church, suffered there, and Jerome, 

^ Dr. Chaplin, in Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration 
Fund, 1876, p. 23. 

^ After the building of the churches most of the Hebrew traditions 
attached to Mount Moriah were transferred to the *' New Jerusalem." The 
Adam legend has a different origin. 

^ The tradition is perpetuated by the skull, often accompanied bj cross- 
bones, which is seen beneath the cross, on crucifixes, and in pictures of the 

* The Greek and Latin Churches still hold the tradition that Adam, or 
at least his head, was buried at Golgotha. This view is held bj Quaresmius, 
Baronius, Massius, Lorinus, Torniellus, Jeremy Taylor, G. WilUams, and 

^ Appendix III., 16. 

whose views are discussed in the next section, are the only 
writers of importance who explain the word without connecting 
it with the tradition. 

2. That Golgotha was so called because it was the public place of 
execution, and abounded with the skulls of executed criminals. — These 
skulls, according to some authorities, lay about unburied, and, 
according to others, were hidden from view in an adjoining 
rock-hewn tomb, into which the heads and bodies of those 
who were executed were cast.^ 

In the works of Greek authors there is no indication of any 
belief or tradition that Golgotha was a public place of execu- 
tion. The idea appears to have originated with Jerome, who 
writes : — " Outside the city and without the gate there are places 
wherein the heads of condemned criminals are cut off, and 
which have obtained the name of C'alvary — that is, of the 
oeheaded. .... From this it is evident that Calvary does 
not mean the sepulchre of the first man, but the place of the 
beheaded." ^ Jerome's view was iKlopted by the Venerable Bede ^ 
(a.d. 730) and other Latin writers. The fuller explanation of 
the place-name is given by Nicolaus de Lyra- -" because that 
place was full of the heads of the dead who had been decapi- 
tated there, since malefactors were punished at the spot " ; ^ and by 
Erasmus — "because they cast there the heads of those who were 
executed."^ In the same sense Jeremy Taylor (a.d. 1613-67) 
writes, "the charnel house of the city, and the place of 

' According to the Talmud of Jerusalem, Sanhedrin vi, 9, 10 (written about 
A.D. 160), the Sanhedrin possessed two public burial-places — one for those 
decapitated or strangled, the other for those stoned or burned. When the 
flesh had dii>appeared, the bones were removed to the family tomb. {Le 
Talmud de Jerusalem^ vol. x, translated bj M. Schwab, Paris, a.d. 1888.) 

* Appendix lll.,ll,iii. See, however, the letter to Marcella (Appendix 
III., 11, i), in which Jerome appears to accept the Adam legend. The quaint 
idea of Theodosius (circa a.d. 5H0), that Calvary was so called because men 
had their heads shaved there {ilUc decaLvabantur homines) ^ need only be 
mentioned (De Terra Sancia ; Palestine Filgrim^* Texts ^ vol. ii). 

' Appendix III., 17. 

* On Matt, xxvii, 33. Quoted by Bynaeus, De morte Jesu Christi, 
vol. iii, p. 264 (Amsterdam, a.d. 1698). 

* lUd. 


execution *' ; ^ and Fuller, " because men's bones were scattered 
thereabouts "2 (but see p. 11). Grotius and Vossius,* on the other 
hand, consider that the spot was not called Golgotha because 
skulls were left lying about, since that was contrary to Eoman 
and Jewish custom, but from the fact that it was the public place 
of execution : this was also the opinion of Luther.** 

In more recent times the explanation has been adopted, 
either fully or partially, sometimes as an alternative, by several 
wTiters. Thus Plessing remarks,^ " By this name (Golgotha) 
the Evangelists mean the place of execution at Jerusalem '' ; 
and Sepp^ holds a similar view. Langlois considers '^ that 
Golgotha was "the place where criminals were crucified," or 
" the great Jewish cemetery of Jerusalem " ; and Warren 
suggests ^ that " it may have been the place of public execu- 
tion, where bodies were allowed to be devoured bv birds and 
beasts, &c. (Gen. xl, 19 ; 2 Kings ix, 35 ; Herod, iii, 12), and 
thus have acquired this name." 

The arguments urged by the advocates of this explanation 
are: — That there were in the time of Christ, as there are at 
present, certain fixed spots for the execution of criminals ; ^ that 
these places were known by special names, e,g., Sesteitiiim, or 
Scalce Genionice, at Eome, and Kopa^ (cmims) in Thessaly ; ^^ that 

* Life of Christ, xv, § 30 (Heber's edition of. the Works of Jeremy Taj lor, 
iii, 260; ef, p. 374, " a hill of death and dead bones, polluted and impure "). 

2 Pisgah-Sight of Palestine ^ p. 344 (Lond.^ a.d. 1650). 
^ Bynaeus, De Morte Jesu ChrisU. 

^ Meyer {^Commentary on Matt, xxvii, 33), who also cites as supporters 
of this Tiew — Fritzsche, Strauss, Tholuck, and Friedlieb. 

* Ueber Golgotha und Christi Grab (Halle, a.d. 1789). 

^ "Golgatha selbst lieisst das Hochgerieht"; Jerusalem und das Eeilige 
Landy i, 428 (a.d. 1873). See also Mislin, Les Saints-LieuXy ii, 25 (Paris, 
A.D. 1851). 

^ Un chapiire inedil de la question des Lieux-Saints (Paris, a.d. 1861). 

^ AsanalternatiyeTiew, Hastings' Diciionarg oftheBihUt, Art. ** Golgotha." 

^ For instance, the Mamertines had such a place on the Pompeian Way 
outside their city (Messina), and the Romans one for the crucifixion of slaves 
and malefactors of the lowest class, about 2.^ Roman miles from the Esquiline 
Gate (Tacitus, Annals, xr, 60). 

^^ Sestertium, from semis tertius, that is, two and a half (miles from 
the city) ; K6pa^, corvus (Alexander de Alexandro, Dies Genialei, lib. iii. 

there must have been such a place at Jerusalem ; and that its 
name was Golgotha. 

The objections to the explanation are : — That as the singular, 
not the plural, is always used in the Bible narrative — " the place 
of a skull " {icpaviou T0V09), not " the place of skulls " (Kpnvi'aw 
ToVos), or simply, as in Luke, " the skull " (to Kpaviov) — the name 
could not have referred to a collection of skulls ; that decapita- 
tion, though it was a lioman form of punishment, and may have 
prevailed amongst the Jews under Roman nile, was not a 
common Jewish custom, and that the name, which possibly 
existed before the Eoman occupation of Palestine, could not 
have been derived from the skulls of decapitated persons : that 
since, in accordance with Jewish law (Dent, xxi, 23), the Jews 
buried those who had been put to death on the evening of the 
day of their execution, and crucified Jewish criminals were 
allowed burial under the Komans,^ the unburicd dead or their 
skulls could not have been lying about ; that a fixed public place 
of execution, according to Western ideas, is unknown in the 
East, and that if such a place existed at Jerusalem, and was 
known as Golgotha, the name would probably have been attached 
to places of a similar nature in other parts of Palestine — there 
is, however, no known instance of such use of the name ; - that, 
if the words in John xix, 41, Matt, xxvii, 60,^ are to be taken 
literally, the explanation involves the almost inconceivable 
theory that the garden of Joseph of Arimathea was the public 
place of execution or immediately adjoined it, and that Joseph 
deliberately made a new tomb for himself at, or very near, a 
spot which every Jew must have regarded with abhorrence as 

cap. 5, p. 92a), raTen or crow, a term probablj borrowed from tlie unburied 
bodies on which the birds fed. 

* Matt, ixvii, 58 ; John xix, 3S. This was apparently omitted in excep- 
tional circumstances (Jos^hus, Wars, iv, 5, § 2). 

2 The same objection applies with equal, if not greater, force to the 
suggestions of Langlois, and Bovet ( Voyage en Terre Sainte, p. 196, 3rd ed., 
Pari*, A.D. 1862), that the name was applied to, or connected with, a 
cemetery of rock-hewn tombs. 

' " Now in the place {iv nf roiry) where he was crucified was a garden ; 
and in the garden a new tomb *' ; and Matthew says that Joseph laid the 
body " in his own new tomb.'* 


iinclean;^ that, philologically, the view that Golgotha means 
place of execution is inadmissible. 

The explanation of the place-name incidentally raises the 
question of the existence or non-existence of a public place of 
execution at Jerusalem. This point is discussed in the next 
chapter. It will be suflScient here to admit that the Place of 
Stoning, or Beth haSekelah, may possibly have been a fixed 
spot in late Jewish, i.e,, Maccabsean and post-Maccabajan, times ; 
and that, if Stephen suffered martyrdom at the Place of Stoning, 
that spot was, according to a tradition at least as old as the 
fifth century, outside the Damascus Gate. There is, however, 
no evidence of any kind to show that the Beth harSekelah was 
called Golgotha,^ or that it was the place at which the Eomans 
executed criminals either by crucifixion or by decapitation. A 
consideration of Roman custom leads to the belief that crucifixion 
at a Jewish place of execution, if there were one, was a possible 
but not a probable occurrence. Authorities who accept the view 
that Golgotha was a public place of execution are not always 
agreed with regard to its identity with the Jewish " Place of 
Stoning." For instance, Hildebrand, regarding the two places 
as identical, locates the scene of Stephen's martyrdom at " the 
place of a skull." ^ Conder believes that Christ was crucified 
at the Beth ha-Sekelah.* Warren, on the other hand, writes : ^ 
^* It (Golgotha) was probably distinct from the place of. stoning, 
because at this time the Jewish Sanhedriii, though it could 
condemn, could not put to death without the intervention of the 
Koman Governor." 

3. Because Golgotha, in some fashion or oilier , resembled a human 
skull, — This is the explanation which finds most favour at the 

^ It is, on the other hand, quite conceiyable that Joseph may have owned 
the ground in which the supposed tomb of Adam was situated, and hare 
selected a place in it for his own sepulchre. 

- There is no apparent connection between " the place of a skull *' or 
'^ the skull," and the infliction of the death penalty by stoning. 

^ Qui extra urbem ductus ad calvaries locum,'' Joachimus Hildebrandus, 
De Frecibus veterum Christianorum^ p. 17, § 10 (A.D. 1667). 

* Handbook to the Bible, 4th ed., 1887, pp. 355, 356. 

^ Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Art. ** Golgotha.'' 


present day ; but there are differences of opinion with regard to 
the nature of the resemblance. A large majority of writers 
consider Golgotha to have been either a rounded knoll, or under- 
feature, of bare rock, or a hillock with skull-shaped top; and 
associate with it the idea of height, prominence, and wide 
visibility. Thus Jeremy Taylor writes : ^ " Calvary, a place 
difficult in the ascent, eminent and apt for the publication of 
shame, a hill of death and dead bones, polluted and impure " ; 
Fuller, that it was so called " Either from the fashion thereof, 
because that hill was rounded up in the form of a man's head " ; - 
and Warren, " From the appearance of the place itself, from its 
round and skulMike contour, the Hebrew word Golgotha being 
applied to the skull from its rounded form."^ Fisher Howe 
considers * that Golgotha was the crown of an " isolated skull- 
shaped hill," with "a skull-like front or face," and "eminently 
conspicuous " ; ^ Bo vet says that it was " A small knoll, or 
summit, like those seen in large numbers to the north of 
Jerusalem. ... It was no doubt a bare rock, such as those 
knolls usually are."** Renan writes that Golgotha " corresponds, 
it seems, to our word chaumorUy and probably designated a knoll 
of bare rock {tertre dinudd) having the form of a bald head.""^ 
Thenius remarks, that "It may have had its name from its 
likeness to a skull " ; ^ and he cites as analogies the tumuli in 
Thessaly called Gy^nocephalce (Li v., xxxiii, 7), the hill called 
Ev/)i;j;\o9, latus clavus, near Syracuse (Thucyd., vii, 2 ; Liv. 
XXV, 25), and the Ochsenkopf, a peak of the Fichtelgebirge. 

* Heber's edition of the works of Jeremy Taylor, iii, p. 374, § 3. 

'■* Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible ; *' or, because men's bones were 
scattered tbereabonts" Fuller {Pisgah — Sight of Palestine ^ p. 344). 

Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Art. " Golgotha." 

^ The True Site of Calvary (New York, A.D. 1871). 

^ Cf the Speaker's Commentary on the Bible, New Testament , toI. i, 
p. 190, "on Matt, xxvii, 33 " — "A mound sloping on all sides, sufficiently 
high to be seen from some distance." 

• Voyage en Terre Sainte, p. 196. 

' Vie de JSsus, 16th ed., p. 429. 

® Gdlgotha, Sfc.^ in Illgen's Zeitschrift fur die historische Theologie, 
Tol. xii, Part 4, pp. 1-34 (a.d. 1842) . 


A similar view is taken by Meyer, who compares the German 
use of the words hapf, scheitely and stirn.^ Guthe maintains that 
the name was derived from a knoll, or, better still, an under- 
feature with a projecting cliff of rounded form, which reminded 
those who looked at it of a skull. His view is that the natural 
feature was the origin of the place-name ; and that Jewish fancy 
declared the grotesque skull to be that of Adam, and placed 
the tomb of the first man beneath it.- General Gordon con- 
sidered the resemblance to a skull to consist in the form of the 
ground, as represented by a contour on the Ordnance Survey 
Plan of Jerusalem.^ 

The explanation is considered unsatisfactory by Alford,^ 
Mommert,^ and others. 

There is no indication in the Bible that Golgotha was skull- 
like in form, or that Christ was crucified on a knoll, a hillock, 
or a hill. The narrative does indeed imply that the crucifixion 
was visible to many spectators ; but this would have been tlie 
case if the crosses had been erected in one of the valleys that 
enclose or intersect the Jerusalem plateau, and the lookers-on 
had stood on its slopes. The features of the ground near the 
city are, in fact, such that elevation is not necessary for 

No early Greek or Latin writer suggests resemblance to a 
skull as an explanation of the place-name ; and, with the excep- 
tion of Cyril of Jerusalem and Gregory Nazianzen, no Greek 
writer connects Golgotha with the idea of height or altitude. 

^ Commentarti on Matt, xxvii, 3. According to Mejer, the writers 
Galoyius, Reland, B»jDgel, Paulus, Lucke, de Wette, Ewald, Bleek, Volkmar, 
Keim, and Weiss trace the name to the shape of the hill. See also Brandt, 
Die JEvangelische Geschichte^ p. 168; and Arts. '^Golgatha*' in Schonkel, 
Bihel Lexikon^ and Riehm, Handtoorterhuch des biblischen Altertums. 

- Hauck, Real ency Mop sedie fur protestantische TheologiCy Art. "Grab 
das heilige," 3rd ed. (a.d. 1899). 

' On the ^^Vo scale plan of 1864-5 ; see Quarterly Statement y 1885, 
p. 78 ; 1901, pp. 402, 403, and Appendix VII. 

■* The Greek Tt-stament^ vol. i, p. 292, on Matt, xxvii, 33. 

* Oolgotha und das heilige Grab in Je)*usalem (Leipzig, A.D. 1900). 

• See the extract from Ambrose (Appendix III., 10, ii), " Tlie plivce of 
the cross was either in the midst, that it might be seen of all/' &c. 


Cyril, lecturing in the immediate vicinity of the isolated rock 
of Gc^gotha, which rose above the general level of the platform 
upon which the churches of Constantine stood, alludes to it as 
" this holy place which is raised above all others," and " this 
holy Golgotha rising on high, and showing itself to this day." ^ 
Gregory (a.d. 325-391) calls the rock " tower-like." - Both ideas, 
however, appear to have been current in the fourth century, for 
they are referred to and declared to be erroneous by Epiphanius. 
" There is nothing to be seen in the place lesembling this name ; 
for it is not situated upon a height that it should be called [the 
plaice] of a skull, answering to the place of the head in the 
human body ; neither has it the shape of a lofty watch-tower, 
for it does not even rise above the places round about it.-' 

The skull-like appearance and elevation of Golgotha appear 
to have been fancies introduced from the West. No Greek 
writers use the expression *' mount." Without exception they 
call ^ the spot " Golgotha," " the place Golgotha," " the holy 
place Golgotha," " the skull," " the place of a skull." or "of the 
skull," &c. The first, so far as is known, to use any expression 
connecting Golgotha with altitude is the Bordeaux Pilgrim 
(circa A.D. 333) who visited Jenisalem whilst the churches of 
Constantine were being built, and calls the spot " little Mount 
Golgotha"^ (MorUiculus Golgotha), At first the expression does 
not seem to have found favour with Latin writers, for Jerome 
uses the terms " the skull " (Calvaria), " the place of a skull " 
(locus Calvarice), and " the rock of the cross " ^' (rmris nipes) ; 

^ Catechetical Lectures, x, 19 ; xiii, 39. The lectures were delivered in 
the Basilica of Constantine, called by St. Silvia the "Great Church in 
Golgotha," to distinguish it from the Anastasis, or Church of the Resurrection. 

2 Appendix III., 18. •* Appendix III., 3. 

* ToKyoddi orovToKyodarirKOS; 6 rSiros rov aylov ro\yoda ; Kpaviov ', npaviov 
r6iro5 ; 6 rSiros rov Kpaviov; rov Kpaviov x«*'pos ; &c. 

" The Bordeaux Pilgrim, p. 23, " The little hill of Golgotha where the 
Lord was crucified." Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. i. 

® Epistola ad Paulinum (circa A.D. 395), Migne, Patrologia Latina, 
xxii, col. 581. The expression *' in Montem Calvariae " occurs in a collection 
of writings wrongly (?) attributed to Jerome {On Mark); Migne, Patrologia 
Laiina, xxx, col. 565. 


Rufinus (a.d. 345-410) mentions " the rock of Golgotha " 
{Golgothana rujpes) ; ^ see also Eucherius ^ (circa a.d. 440). The 
"mount" is unknown to Tertullian, Ambrose, and Augustine; 
but in the sixth century Golgotha is referred to as a " mount " 
(Mons) in the Breviarius ^ {circa a.d. 530), and by Theodosius.^ 
Bede and Willibald, in the eighth century, revert to the earlier 
form. "Golgotha," and the "place of a skull," but in the ninth 
century " Mount Calvary " reappears in the pilgrimage of Bernard 
(a.d. 870).^ In later times the expression is very frequently 
used by Latin authors, from whose writings it has passed into 
the languages of the West. It would almost appear that the 
Western type of mind required a material elevation of Golgotha 
to complete the spiritual idea of looking up to the Redeemer 
upon the Cross, and to ensure wide visibility. At any rate, the 
idea of height in connection with the Crucifixion has been so 
persistent in the Western mind that in Latin translations from 
the Greek, xpaviov toVos, " the place of a skull " is often rendered 
Mons CalmricBy Mount Calvary ; ^ and in the Calvaries of Roman 
Catholic countries the cross stands on an eminence reached by a 
Via Dolorosa marked by the stations of the Cross.^ So, too, in 
our own country, the words of a popular hymn — 

" There is a green hill far away, outside a city wall '* — 
teach every child to believe that Christ suffered on the top of a 
hill. The origin of the term " Mount '' Calvary may perhaps 
be sought in the isolation of the rock of the Cross, which, as we 

' Historia Eccleaiatica^ ix, 6. Juvencus uses the expression *' the field 
named G-olgotha" {Evangelicse Historix, lib. iv, Migne, Patrologia Latitia^ 
xix, col. 334). 

2 Palestine Pilgrims^ 2Var<*,vol. ii. ' Palestine Pilgrims' Texts, vol. ii. 

* De Terra iSancta, ii. The accepted reading is locus Calvarix^ as iu 
Palestine Pilgrims^ Texts, vol. ii, but some old MSS. read Mons Calvan'a 
(Toblerand Molinier, Itinera Hierosolymitanay pp. 63, 355). 

* Palestine Pilgrims' Texts^ vol. iii. 

* Also locum sacri Montis Golgotha^ for o tStkos rov ayiovToXyoda. Even 
in the last English edition of " Sozomen*s Ecclesiatical History " Kpayioy is 
translated Mount Calvary ( Wace and Schaff, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathe^r.s, 
vol. ii). 

« These '* Ways of the Cross " were introduced by the Franciscans in the 
Middle Ages, for those who were unable to make a pilgrimage to the If ol v 


shall see later on, formed part of the design of Constantinc's 
architect. In the very interesting mosaic in the tribune of tlm 
Basilica of S. Pudenziana at Itome, which is supposed to dat(^ 
from the fourth century,^ and to represent Constantine's churches 
at Jerusalem, and on the Mount of Olives, the cross is repre- 
sented as standing on a little hill that corresponds exactly to thit 
MorUiculus GolgotJia of the Bordeaux Pilgrim. If this form were 
originally given to the rock,- the idea that its rounded top was- 
skull-like would appeal strongly to the materialistic tendency nt" 
the Western mind. 

On several tombstones of the sixth century, foimd by 
M. Clermont-Ganneau in Palestine, the cross stands upon a 
three-lobed or trefoil base, which, in ancient art, c.ff.y Assyrian, 
is the symbol for a hill or mountain. M. Clermont-Ganneau, 
from whose "Archaeological Resefirches" the illustration (Fig. 1) is 
taken,' regards the symbol as evidence th«at popular belief in very 
early times began to regard Golgotha as an eminence — *' Mount 
Calvary." The base seems, however, to be a conventional repre- 
sentation of "the rock of the cross,'* which possibly first came 

^ The church is supposed to occupy the site of the house of Puden.o, in 
which St. Paul lodged. The two daughters of Pudens were converts by 
St. Paul, and from one of them the church derives its name. The mo8ai(^ 
represents Christ enthroned, and blessing with the right hand. Beside Him 
are SS. Peter and Paul, in the act of being crowned by the two daughters of 
Pudens, and other figures. In the background are the cross on Hh rock. 
emblems of the Eyangelists, and buildings which will bo more fully noticed 
later. The church is said to haye been restored by Pope Siricius (a.d. 
S84-398), and the mosaics, though often repaired, to date from the foui'tli 
century, or to have been copied from others of tliat date (Murray, Handbwik- 
to Some). 

' Many authorities believe that the Mount Calvary of the present du\ 
is an artificial construction, and this was, perhaps, the view of Quaresmiui*^ 
if we may judge from his interpretation of Gregory Nazianzen's {a.d. 
825-891) Christus Pattens (Appendix III., 18). My own examination of tlie 
spot has led me to believe that the " Mount " is natural rock, somewliat 
altered from its original form by the vicissitudes which it has undergone- 
and the yarious reconstructions of the church. The mosaic appears, at first 
sight, to confirm ths idea of artificial construction; but the horizontal line:< 
are probably intended to represent the thin beds of limestone. 

' Palestine Fund MemoirSy ArchcBological Researches in Palestine, i, 337 ; 
ii, 407, 409, 4*10, 416, and the accompanying woodcuts. 


into use ill the fifth century, when the attitude of the Church in 
-Jerusalem towards " holy places," and symbolism in art was, to 
aay the least, sympathotlc. The symbol is ao suggestive of a 
hill, and the upper lobe is ao akull-like in form, that the whole 
could not fail lo strengthen the Western theory that Golgotha 
was a hill with a skull-shaped suiumit. 


It has been urged, in support of the view that Golgotha 
derived its name from its akull-like appearance, that place-names 
of a similar nature occur in the Bible and Josephua, e.g., the 
shoulder (sliScMm, Gen, xlviii, 22, cf. Josh, xv, 8, xviii, 16), the 
navel, apparently for a pass, in Judges ix, 37, and GamaLt, from 
the hump of a camel, in Joeephus. Place-names taken from 
fancied resemblance to parts of the human body are known in 
all languages, but there is no evidence that any physical feature 
was called " the skull " ^ or " the place of a skull," from its like- 

' El-Jumeijmeh, "the little skulls," a amall Tillage on a hill-top in 
Northern Palestine, has been oitBd(EiiC!iclopsdiaSibtica, Art. "Qolgotha") 
aaaQiastmnceof a place - nBine SDatogous to Golgotha. The origin of the name 


ness to a human skull, in llebrc.v, or in any of the cognate 
languages. It may be added that the thin beds of hard siliceous 
chalk, or limestone, which form the upper surface of the 
Jerusalem plateau, do not weathe:- into bare rocky knolls of 
skull-like form and appearance, such j;s are sometimes to be seen 
in places where the softer rock comes to the surface. On the 
small plateau the knolls only assume a rounded form when 
covered with soil or rubbish. There is no feature which can be 
compared with the Schneekoppe in the Kiesengebirge, the 
Schneekopf in the Thiii-inger AVald, or the T^te de Nore, near 
Marseilles, cited by Brandt ^ as skull-shaped hills resembling 
Golgotha. If any resemblance to a skull existed at Golgotha it 
must have been to a profile as suggested by Guthe (see p. 12). 

The natural conclusion from the above discussion seems to be 
that Golgotha derived its name from a local legend which con- 
nected it with a skull, possibly that of Adam,^ as all the early 
Christian Fathers who mention the subject assert. And that the 
theories which identify " the place of a skull " with a public 
place of execution, or with a spot, whether on an eminence or 
not, which resembled a skull, are of later growth and probably 
of Western origin. One interesting but very obscure question, 
the possible connection between Golgotha and the name, j^lia 
Capitoliruij of Hadrian's new city, is discussed in Chapter IX. 

is not known, but there is no resemblance between the hill and little skulls. 
Probably, as in the case of Bamath-lehi (Judges xv, 17), *' the hill of the 
jaw-bone," the place-name is deriyed from some incident or legend con- 
nected with the spot. Hilprecht mentions a village, and part of a mound, 
at the south end of the ruins of Babylon, called Jumjuma, meaning " Skull, 
Calvary," but no explanation of the place-name is given (Explorations 
in Bible Lands ^ pp. 30, 165, it. 2). 

^ Die Evangdische Oeschichte. 

^ In Quarterly Statement ^ 1901, p. 403, Dr. Schick suggests that the 
skull was that of Goliath, brought to Jerusalem by David (1 Sam. xvii, 54), 
buried there by him, and found again when Nehemiah rebuilt the walls. 






IN THE Time of Christ? 

The view that there was a public place of execution at Jerusalem 
is supported by no direct evidence. But many writers have 
accepted it as being, in their opinion, in accordance with Jewish 
and Eoman custom, and some remarks seem necessary upon 
what is at present known of the circumstances connected with 
capital punishment amongst the Jews and Eomans. 

1. Jewish Capital Punishment. — According to the Talmud,^ 
four methods of capital punishment were sanctioned by Jewish 
law — stoning, burning, decapitation, and strangling {Sanhedrin 
vii, 1). Of these it is only necessary to take the first and third 
into consideration. 

The penalty of decapitation, or death by the sword, is not 
sanctioned directly by the Divine command. Its indirect sanction 
is deduced from a comparison of the words in Ex. xxi, 20, " he 
shall surely be punished," with those in Lev. xxvi. 25, " and I 
will bring a sword upon you that shall execute the vengeance of 
the covenant " {Sanhedrin vii, 1). The instances of execution by 
sword or spear recorded in the Bible are due either to Divine 
direction (Ex. xxxii, 27); to individual action, prompted by 
Divine impulse (Num. xxv, 7, 8 ; 1 Sam. xv, 33 ; 1 Kings xix, 1) ; 
or to an order from the King or persons in authority .^ None of 
tie sentences appear to have been carried out at a public place 
of execution. 

* Le Talmud de Jerusalem^ vol. i, Sanhedrin, translated by M. Schwab. 

' Judg. ix, 5 ; 1 Sam. xxii, 18, 19; 2 Sam. i, 15, iy,2 ; 1 Kings ii, 25, 34; 
2 Kings X, 7, xxi, 4; 2 Kings xi, 16-20; 2 Ch. xxiii, 15; Jer. xxvi, 23; 
Matt. xi\, 10. 


SloniTtg was the primitive and popular form of execution 
inflicted on criminals guilty of heinous crimes. Originally 
everyone took part in the execution as a patriotic act, which 
removed a criminal of the worst description from the community. 
Moses, by Divine command, introduced reforms which restrained 
the passions of the multitude by insisting that those who had 
testified against the condemned person should commence the 
stoning.^ The Talmudists completely altered the method of 
execution; they made it judicial, and threw the condemned 
person down from a height. He was only stoned if he did not 
succumb to the fall (Sanhedrin vi, 5). The criminal was executed 
outside the camp or city,^ possibly near one of the gates 
(Deut. xvii, 5, xxii, 24) ; but, apparently, sometimes within the 
camp or city limits (Deut. xxii, 21 ; r/. John x, 31, where the 
Jews are said to have taken up stones to stone Jesus in Solomon's 
Porch). After the stoning, the body was hung on a sort of 
gibbet until sunset, and then buried outside the city, heaps 
of stones being raised over it (Deut. xxi, 23; Josh, vii, 26; 
X, 26, 27). 

The method of execution in later times is described in the 
Talmud. The sentence was carried out at some distance from 
the place where the Court sat {Sanhedrin vi, 1). According to 
Maimonides,^ if the trial took place outside the city, the place of 
execution was three Sabbath days' journey from it. The place of 
stoning, or Beth ha-Sekelah, was twice the height of a man. One 
of the witnesses threw the condemned person down from this 
elevation in such a manner that he fell upon his back. If the fall 
did not kill him, another witness cast the first stone; and, if this 
did not suffice, the bystanders, or all Israel, stoned him till he 
died.* In carrying out the sentence a natural feature, such as 
a low cliflF, or rock-scarp, was not necessary, and is not mentioned 
in any of the treatises of the Talmud. But "a cliff of pre- 

^ Ex. xvii, 4, xix, 13 ; Lev. xxiv, 14-16 ; Deut. xiii, 9, xvii, 2-7, xxi, 21, 
xxii, 21, 22 ; Josh, vii, 25 ; Luke xx, 6 ; Acts vii, 58, xiv, 5 ; cf. John viii, 7. 

^ Lev. xxiv, 14; Josh, vii, 1^4-26; 1 Kings xxi, 13 ; Acts vii, 58. 

' Sanhedrin xii, 3, p. 96. Quoted bj Hanauer in (Quarterly Siatementf 
1881, pp. 318, 319. * SanhedHn vi, 5. 

B 2 


cipitation " may be referred to in Luke iv, 29,^ if the intention of 
the Jews was to stone Jesus. When the accused had been found 
guilty and sentenced by the Sanhedrin, a stage or scaffold of 
wood, 2 which could be set up at any convenient spot, and thrown 
away after use, like the gibbet upon which the body was exposed 
after death, was perhaps used, the spot becoming for the time the 
Beth ha-Sekelah. The bodies of those stoned for blasphemy or 
idolatry were exposed after death on a removable gibbet, but were 
taken down when night commenced and buried without honour 
in a common burial-place which belonged to the Sanhedrin.^ 

There is nothing in the Bible or Josephus to suggest that 
condemned persons were stoned at a spot set apart for the 
purpose. Places of public execution, according to Western ideas, 
are not, and never have been, customary in the East.^ The 
usual practice has been, and is, to execute important criminals at 
places where the greatest impression would be made on the 
people ; and in the case of obscure criminals to allow the soldiers, 
or others in charge, to carry out the sentences where they 
pleased. It is, however, a possible inference from the fact that 
the Sanhedrin owned a biu*ial-place for executed criminals 
(Sanhedrin vi, 9), that the Beth ha-Sekelah, whether a cliff or a 
scaffold, was not far from the sepulchre. Assuming that this was 
the case, there is nothing in the Talmud to show the direction of 
the place of stoning, with regard to the city. There is, it is true, a 
tradition, at least as old as the fifth century A.D., which places 

* " And led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, 
that they might throw him down headlong." 

2 Thia was, apparently, the view taken by Munk, who writes, ** Selon la 
loi traditionelle {Mischnahy 4™® partie, Synhedrin, ch. 4, § 4), on lan^ait le 
patient du baut d'un echafaud eleve de deux hauteurs d'homme, et puis on 
raceueillait do pierres" {Palestine^ p. 214&, n. 1). So also S. Mendelsobn, 
in Jewish Encyclopxdiay Art. " Capita] Punishment " — " The convict having 
been placed on a platform twice his height." 

3 Sanhedrin tI, 6, 7, 9 ; Josephus, Ant. iv, 8, § 6 ; cf, iv, 8, § 24, where 
the body of a rebellious child is to be exposed, not hung up. 

■• Biehm, Handvoorterbuch des hiblischen Altertums, Art. " Golgotha." 
Fallmerayer appears to go too far when he says that in Jerusalem and the 
whole East there never was, and is not now, a public place of execution 
according to Western ideas (Oeaammelte Werke^ i, p. 160). 


the scene of Stephen's martyrdom on the north side ^ of the city, 
outside the Damascus Gate. There is also a local tradition 
current amongst the Jerusalem Jews of Spanish origin,^ which 
identifies the Beth ha-Sekelah with el-Edhemtyeh,^ or Jeremiah's 
Grotto, and the knoll beneath which it lies. But another local 
tradition * places the spot to the west of the city, near the 
Convent of the Cross. How far the local traditions are trust- 
worthy it is impossible to say, l)ut probably not much reliance 
can be placed upon either of them. 

Roman Capital Punishment, — The question whether the 
Eomans had a public place of execution at Jerusalem, and, if so, 
whether it was identical with the Beth ha-Sekelah, is equally 
obscure. With regard to decapitation^ Jerome writes : " Outside 
the city, and without the gate, there are places wherein the 
heads of condemned criminals are cut off, and which have obtained 
the name of Calvary — that is, of the beheaded '' •'' ; as if there 

* In the original Greek of the Latin version of the story of the discovery 
of the relies of St. Stephen, it is said that tlie martyr's body lay for a night 
and a day " on the exopylct of the town on the side by which we go to the 
Kedar.'* M. Clermont-Ganneau considers the eiopyla to be the heaps of 
lef use outside the city, and '* the Kedar " to be some unknown place near 
Jerusalem (Secueil d* Archeologie Orientate, 1900, p. 66). A different view is 
taken by P. Lagrange in the Revue Blhtique, 19i>0, p. 142. It may be remarked 
that the Damascus Gate represents the po(>ition of the wall of Hadrian, and 
that the tradition may have referred originally to the gate in the second wall 
of Josephiis, which lay some distance to the south. 

2 The ancestors of these Jews only settled at Jerusalem in the 15th 
century, and there is no allusion to their tradition of earlier date than the 
last half of the IJ^ith century. Jews, however, lived at Jerusalem centuries 
before the expulsion from Spain, and some of them a few years ago possessed 
hereditary freehold property in the north-east quarter of the city which they 
alleged had come down to them from their remote ancestors (Chaplin, 
Quarter tif Statement, 1S89, pp. 10, 11). 

' Abbot Daniel (a.d. 1106-7) describes (ix) this place as ** a flat rocky 
mountain which split up at the time of Christ's crucifixion ; the place is 
called Gehenna." Whether the name was originally el-Edhemiyeh, as given 
by Mejr ed-din, or el- Heidemiyeh, *' the rent," is unce»tain. The valley to 
the ea-it, i.e., the head of St. Anne's ravine (see page 25), is connected by 
Moslems with death and the last judgment {Pilgrimage of tht Russian Abbot 
Daniel, Palestine Pilgrims' Texts, vol. iv). 

* HauHuer {Quarterly Statement, 1881, pages 318, 319). 

* Appendix III., 11, iii. 


were, in his day, several places of execution, each of which was 
called Calvary. This is no evidence against the view that, in the 
first century A.D., there was a fixed place of execution, but it is 
suggestive of Roman custom. 

Cracifixion^ in one form or another, was widely spread in the 
ancient world. From the Phoenicians it seems to have passed to 
thd Greeks and Romans, and the latter introduced it into the 
Provinces for the punishment, at first, of slaves, highwaymen, 
rebels, &c. The Jews hung up or exposed the bodies of criminals 
after death ; but crucifixion as a form of capital punishment was 
unknown to the Jewish penal law.^ The Romans ^ crucified 
criminals outside the city or camp. They usually selected for 
such executions the side of a frequented road or pathway ; but 
they often carried them out in a conspicuous place like the 
Campus Martins, at a spot set apart for the purpose like the 
Sestertium (see p. 8), at the place where the crime was 
committed, or occasionally on a hill.^ But the soldiers were 
frequently allowed to carry out the sentence of crucifixion where 
they pleased. At Jerusalem, Florus had Jews of equestrian rank 
crucified in his presence whilst seated on the bema in front of 
Herod's palace ^ ; and Varus seems to have crucified Jews at any 

* The crucifixion of 800 Jews, within the walls of Jerusalem, by Alexander 
Jannseus (Josephus, Wars, i, 4, § 6), seems to have been an exceptional act 
of barbaritj. It has been suggested (Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, Art. 
** Crucifixion ") that in Num. xxv, 4; Deut. xxi, 22; Josh, viii, 29; and 
other passages in the Old Testament, ** hanging " implies crucifixion ; but 
this is doubtful. It probably indicates the hanging, or exposure of the body 
upon a gibbet after death, as a mark of ignominy. Such exposure was 
apparently not uncommon amongst the Egyptians (Gen. xl, 19), the Philis- 
tines (2 Sam. xxi, 12), and the Jews (2 Sam. iv, 12; xxi, 6, 9). Minute 
details with regard to the Jewish mode of cx()08ure after death in later 
times are given in the Talmud. 

2 The authorities for the Roman custom with regard to crucifixion are 
given in Smith's Dictionart/ of the Bible, Dictionary of Greek and Roman 
Antiquities^ and Dictionary of Christian Antiquities ; in Hastings' Diction- 
ary of the Bible ; and in the Encyclopxdia Biblica, Arts. *' Cross," " Cruci- 
fixion," and " Punishments." 

* The practice seems to have been similar to that which prevailed in this 
country, when felons were gibbeted by the roadside, or on a conspicuous spot, 
as spectacles in terrorem (cf '* There the black gibbet glooms beside the 
way," Goldsmitli, Deserted Village). ^ Josephus, Wars, ii, 14, § 9. 


convenient spot as ho marched through the country.^ In 
ordinary cases the body was left upon the cross until it had 
perished through the< action of rain or sun, or had been 
devoured by birds and beasts. Sepulture was usually forbidden, 
but, in consequence of the Jewish law,^ an exception was 
made in favour of the Jews.^ 

The conclusion seems to be that, with our present knowledge, 
it is impossible to say whether there was, or was not, a public 
place of execution at Jerusalem either before or after the lloman 
occupation. There is no evidence that the Romans, during their 
occupation of the city, executed criminals at a public place of 
execution. It would have been contrary to their usual practice 
to do so. There is no evidence of any value that the Jewish 
place of stoning was a fixed spot : there is only a bare possibility 
that it may have been so in Maccabsean and post-Maccabaean 
times. The view that there was a Je\^nsh public place of 
execution at Jerusalem in the first century a.d., and that during 
the Eoman occupation it was the place at which criminals were 
crucified or decapitated is not supported by any evidence direct 
or indirect. 

1 JorepbuB, Ant, xvii, 10, § 10. 

* Deui. xxi, 22, 23. 

3 Matt, xxvii, 58 ; John xix, 38 ; cf. Joseph us, Wars, iy, 6, § 2. 



The Topography of Jerusalem at the Time of the 



The evidence available for the determination of the position of 
Golgotha cannot be adequately discussed without some know- 
ledge of the topography of Jerusalem at the time of the 

The ancient city was built at the end of a well-defined spur, 
which, stretching southward, for about If miles, from the swelling 
ground that separates the waters of the Dead Sea from those of 
the Mediterranean, lies between the valley of Hinnom,^ and that 
of the Kidron (see plan of Jerusalem). The latter, known also as 
the valley of Jehoshaphat, runs eastward, from its source, for 1| 
miles, and then, changing direction to the south, sharply separates 
the long high ridge of Olivet from the lower ground upon which the 
city stands. The valley of Hinnom, after following a southerly 
coiu'se for 1^ miles, turns eastward, and meets the valley of the 
Kidron below the south-east corner of the city. The enclosed 
space may be described as a small rocky plateau, of about 1,000 
acres, which falls gradually towards the south-east and terminates 
in abrupt slopes. The enclosing valleys, at first little more than 
shallow depressions in the ground, become, as they approach the 
city limits, deep, rocky ravines, and their point of junction is 
672 feet below the ground in which they rise. Thus whilst, to 
the north, there is no material difference between the general 
level of the plateau outside the walls and that of the highest 
parts of the city within them, the ravines on the other three sides 
fall so rapidly, and are so trench-like in character, that they leave 

^ The names in common use have been adopted for the purposes of this 
paper, without reference to questions of identification. 


upon the beholder the impression of a ditch at the foot of a 

The surface of the plateau is broken hy two shorter ravines 
which rise to the north of the city walls. The more important, 
the Tyropoeon, runs southward to join the Kidron at Siloam, and 
divides the lower portion of the plateau into two spurs of unequal 
size. The western is high and broad-backed, but its continuity is 
broken by a short ravine ^ that falls abruptly eastward from the 
vicinity of the Jaffa Gate, and joins the Tyropoeon about 
700 yards above Siloam. This ravine formed a natural ditch to 
the first or old wall, and near its head stood Herod's palace which, 
with its three great towers, formed the acropolis of the Upper 
City of Josephus. From one of the towers, Hippicus, the wall 
ran eastward along the south side of the ravine, to the Xystus, 
and there joining the Council House (near a on plan), ended 
-at the western portico of the Temple.^ 

The eastern and lower spur. Mount Moriah, is for the most 
part a narrow ridge of rock, and upon it once stood the Temple 
and the Castle of Antonia. In three places at least (b, c, and c?) 
its crest line is now broken by rock-hewn ditches, and at one spot, 
in the north-west corner of the Har4m esh-Sherlf , a large portion 
of the ridge has been quarried away. One of the ditches (b) 
separates " Jeremiah's Grotto " from the modern city wall ; 
another (c) lies beneath the street that leads to St. Stephen's 
Gate ; and the third (d) is near the north-west corner of the 
platform upon which the Dome of the Kock stands. The outer 
ditch (6) is probably later than the time of the Crucifixion,'* the 
other two are certainly earlier. 

The second of the small ravines '' rises in the eastern half of 
the plateau, and, running through the north-east corner of the 

^ For fuller details of the topography, see Smith's Dictionary of the BihUy 
** Jerusalem/' 2nd ed., p. 1585 fF. 

' I haye called this " Palace Earine " on the plan, from the proximity of 
Herod's palace. 

^ Josephus, WarSy v, 4, § 2. 

** See Chapter X., p. 113. 

• Called " St. Anne's Rayine ** on the plan. 


Haram esh-Sherlf, falls into the Kidron a short distance to the 
north of the Golden Gate. In it lie two ancient pools, and on 
its eastern side now stands the Church of St. Anne. 

Those portions of the ravines which lie within the city walls 
are so filled with ddbris that neither their character nor their true 
course can now be distinguished : their beds lie in places from 
80 feet to 125 feet beneath the surface of to-day. Even the 
rocky sides of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys, above which 
the walls of the city rise, present the appearance of steep con- 
tinuous slopes, broken only by a few terraced gardens. Originally 
the aspect of the ground must have been very different. At 
Jerusalem the limestone hills consist, in ascending order, of beds 
of pink and white indurated chalk, of a thick stratum of soft, 
easily-worked stone (meleke), of thin beds of hard reddish and 
grey stone (misse), and of soft white limestone with bands of 
flints and fossils. The strata have a south-easterly dip, and the 
hard beds of misse, which form the surface of the plateau, pass 
eastward beneath the soft white limestones of the Mount of 
Olives. Before the city was built these strata must have formed 
great steps on the hill-side, and their edges must have stood out 
like artificial walls enclosing the hills. From the hardness of 
the rock there could have been no great accumulation of detritus, 
and the general aspect of the site could not have been very 
unlike that of many spots in the rugged country of Judaea. 
How far the original features of the ground had been modified 
by the time of the Crucifixion it is difficult to say, but there 
can be little doubt that the ravines were then deep and rocky, 
and that the terrace-formation was well marked within and 
without the walls. Beyond the limits of the city the terraces 
were probably planted with fig, olive, and vine ; and the small 
cliffs, or scarps, in which the limestone beds terminated, were 
utilised for the construction of rock-hewn tombs. Deeply-cut 
ravines, with terraced sides, are common in the limestone 
formation of Central and Southern Palestine, and in many 
places the conjunction of cultivated terrace and scarp with 
rock-hewn tombs may still be seen. In fitting a site of this 


nature to the requirements of a capital city, with its public 
buildings, its streets, its open places, and its fortifications, it was 
obviously necessary to obtain a certain number of level spaces, 
or platforms. This was done partly by quarrying away large 
masses of rock and partly by constructing massive foundations 
of hewn stone. In nearly every quarter of the city excavations 
bring to light isolated rock-scarps and fragments of solid masonry 
that, in many cases, are due to these rock-clearances and sub- 
structures, or to small quarries whence building material has 
been obtained. In no instance is the age of these remains 
certain, and, without extensive excavation, it is extremely 
hazardous to base a theory with regard to the course of the 
ancient walls on the assumption that any two isolated ruins are 

According to Josephus,^ Jerusalem, when besieged by Titus, 
was defended on the north by three walls, and on all other sides 
by one. The outer, or third wall, on the north, was built after 
the Crucifixion by Agrippa (ad. 41-43), and need not be con- 
sidered here. Nearly all authorities agree that the oldest, or 
first wall, ran eastward from the citadel by the Jaffa Gate to 
a point in the west wall of the Har^m esh-Sherlf at or near 
Wilson's Arch. The course of the second wall, which is still 
uncertain, is discussed in Chapter XL Outside the first and 
second walls the eastern and western spurs were occupied by 
terraced gardens and a few villas; in the valleys there were 
large reservoirs with conduits, which carried their water to the 
city, and there are some slight indications that the rocky sides 
of St. Anne's ravine, beneath the north-east corner of the Har4m 
esh-Sherlf, were honey-combed with rock-hewn tombs. Inside 
tjie walls Herod's palace and gardens spread over the ground 
now covered by the citadel at the Jaffa Gate and the Armenian 
gardens to the south ; the castle of Antonia stood at the north- 
west angle of the Har^m esh-Sherlf ; and the palace of Agrippa 
— the old Asmonsean palace, occupied a fine site, on the western 
spur, facing the Wailing Place of the Jews. 

» Wars, V, 4, § 2. 


It may be inferred, from the known tendency of main roads 
and streets to preserve their original direction during many 
centuries, and through periods of great change,^ as well as from 
the marked character of the topographical features, that the 
principal approaches to Jerusalem, and several of the streets, 
follow very closely the lines of those which existed in the time 
of Christ, and, probably, at an earlier date. Thus the great 
highway from the north appears, on reaching the " Tombs of 
the Kings," to have branched off, as the modern road does, in 
three directions. The eastern branch,^ following the direction 
of the St. Anne's ravine, reached the castle of Antonia and the 
Temple without leaving the eastern spur. The western branch 
avoided the Tyropceon Valley, and, keeping to the higher ground 
of the western spur, probably entered the city near Herod's palace. 
The central branch ran southward to the Tyropceon Valley, or 
perhaps followed the western road to the head of that valley 
{s on plan), and then turned down it to the Damascus Gate. 
At a point south of this gate the road appears to have forked 
— one arm (/// on plan), now represented by the street el- Wad, 
followed the west side of the Tyropceon to the Pool of Siloam, 
where it left the city and went on to the wilderness of Judah ; 
the other arm {g g g), keeping to a higher level, ran nearly due 
south through the city, along a line still well marked, and passed 
out by a gate in the south wall to the Valley of Hinnom. This 
must have been always one of the principal streets ^ of the city, 
and on it there must have been a fortified gateway in each of 
the three walls. 

From the Jordan Valley on the east, one road crossed the 
ridge of Olivet, and another, followed by Christ on a memorable 
occasion, wound round the shoulder of the same hill. The 

* Nowhere is tliis more clearly seen than in London. In excavations at 
Jerusalem the houses of an old street have been found several feet beneath 
the surface, in exactly the same line as those of the modern street. 

* The roads and streets which are supposed to follow the direction of 
those in the time of Christ are shown on the plan by red dotted lines. 

2 This street and that following the direction of el-WAd are represented 
in the Madeba mosaic as having colonnaded sides. See Plate IX. 


approach to the city seems to have been up St. Anne's ravine, 
but there was, doubtless, a pathway with steps leading directly 
across the Kidron to the Temple precincts.^ The roads from 
Hebron, Bethlehem, and the western districts appear to have 
entered the city by a gateway, near the Jaffa Gate, from which a 
street {h h) ran directly to the Temple precincts near Wilson's 
Arch.2 There may also have been posterns in the west wall, 
giving access to paths which led to the valley of Hinnom. 

The principal streets, running north and south, were con- 
nected by cross streets, forming blocks (inmhe) which were 
intersected by narrow winding lanes.*^ The two main streets 
which cross each other, almost at right angles, probably had a 
central roadway for chariots, camels, &c., and, on either side, a 
trottoir for foot passengers with colonnades, similar to those of 
the principal streets of Damascus, Samaria, Gadara, &c. Other 
streets, possibly representing those of pre-Christian date, are 
that (i i) running from the citadel to the Sion Gate, which, 
perhaps, skirted the gardens of Herod's palace ; that {k k) 
connecting i i and g g ; and two streets (/ and m), which may 
have led westward from the Temple precincts to the city. Thore 
seems also to have been a road (n n) running east and west, 
which, after the third wall was built, may have connected the 
castle of Antonia with the tower Psephinus. Whether these 
streets crossed the Tyropoeon and " Palace " ravines by bridges 
or causeways is unknown. Most of the baz^rs,^ market places,^ 
and important public and private buildings, incidentally men- 
tioned by Josephus, must have been in existence in the time of 
Christ, and the great Temple built by Herod was then in its full 

^ In Byzantine times a flight of ftteps led down from the Golden Gate to 
a bridge over the Kidron, whence there wa<s a path to the Church of the 

^ The ancient street was, probably, witbin the line of the first wall. 

' Josephus, Antf xiv, 16, § 2 ; Wars, ii, 14, § 9 ; v, 8, § 1 ; vi, G, § 3. 
Making allowance for the different topographical conditions, the streets and 
narrow lanes could not have been very unlike those of Pompeii. 

^ IFars, V, 8, § 1. 

• ITor*, i, 13, § 5 ; ii, 14, § 9, 19, § 4 ; v, 4, § 1. 



The Position of Golgotha. — The Bible Narrative. 

The principal sources of information available for the deter- 
mination of the site of Golgotha are the Bible; writings of 
earlier date than the official recovery of Golgotha during the 
reign of Constantine ; the works of Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, 
and Epiphanius, who must have known the circumstances under 
which the site was recovered ; the histories of Bufinus, Sulpicius 
Severus, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Theophanes, and others, 
who were compilers, and recorded the traditions current at the 
times they wrote; letters, sermons, treatises of the Church 
Fathers ; the monograph of Alexander Monachus (sixth century), 
Dp Inventione Cruds ; and early traditions and legends. 

The Bible narrative of the Crucifixion, and of the events which 
preceded it, contains, unfortunately, no definite information with 
regard to the position of Golgotha, or of the places connected 
with the trial and condemnation of Chrifet. 

After the Last Supper, Christ and his disciples left the city, 
and crossing the brook ^ Kidron, went to the Mount of Olives, to 
a plot of ground, or garden, called Gethsemane.^ The spot was 
one to which Jesus often resorted with his disciples, and it was 
consequently well known to Judas who betrayed him.^ Luke, 
who does not mention Gethsemane, says ^ that Jesus " went, as 
his custom was, unto the Mount of Olives," and that when he 
was " at the place " he bade his disciples pray. 

' Reviled Yewion, Margin, *' or ravine ^ Greek, tointer'torrent" 
« See Chapter V. 

•' Matt, xxvi, 30, S6; Mark xiv, 26, 32; John xviu, 1, 2, 26. 
* Luke xxii, 39, 40. 


From Gethsemane Christ was taken, in the first place, to 
Annas, the high priest by right, who, after informal inquiry, sent 
him bound to Caiaphas, the actual high priest — Annas having 
been deposed. At the house of Caiaphas,^ possibly his official 
residence, where the scribes and elders were assembled, a pre- 
liminary investigation was held, and, early the next morning,^ 
Christ was led away to the place ^ where the Sanhedrin usually 
held its sittings, and brought before the full Assembly of the 
chief priests, scribes, and elders of the people."* Immediately 
after his condemnation, whilst it was still early, Christ was taken 
to the Prsetorium (palace), and handed over to Pilate -* that he 
might be put to death by the Roman power. 

It is still uncertain whether the Pra^torium of the Gospels ^ 
was Herod's palace on the western spur, or the Castle of Antonia 
to the north of the Temple. The former was, almost certainly, 
the usual residence of Pilate when at Jerusalem, whilst the latter 
was at once the headquarters of the Roman garrison, " and the 
prison in which important criminals were confined. It is possible 
that Pilate went to the Castle of Antonia, and even passed the 
night there, during the critical days of the feast ; but it is 
equally permissible to suppose that Christ, having 1)een tried and 
condemned at Herod's palace, was taken in the first place to the 
Antonia and that, after a few moments' delay, he was led out 
thence to crucifixion with the robbers who suffered with him. 

The offence for which Christ was tried and condemned by 
Pilate was political — sedition against Caesar.® The Jews aban- 
doning their first charge of blasphemy, accused him of treason. 

1 See Chapter V. 
^ Luke xxii, 66, " at davrn." 

^ Possiblj the Council House mentioned by Josepbus {Warsj v, 4, § 2). 
See Chapter V. 

* Matt. xxTi, 57, xxvii, 1 ; Mark xiv, 53, xv, 1 ; Luke xxii, 54, 66 ; 
John xviii, 1 3, 24. 

* Matt, xxvii, 2 ; Mark xv, 1 ; Luke xxiii, 1 ; John xviii, 28. 
« See Chapter V. 

7 Josephus, WarSf v, 5, § 8. 

* Luke xxiii, 2 ; Matt, xxvii, 11 ; Mark xv,2 ; cf. Apostolic Constitutions, 
v, 14. Many Jews were crucified for this offence by Florus (Josephus, 
WarSf ii, 14), and by Varus (Josephus, Ant., xvii, 10, § 10) 


The trial, whether it took place at Herod's palace or at the 
Antonia, was, in accordance with Eoman custom, public. Pilate, 
probably, had his judgment seat ^ (/^tj^m) erected in the open air, 
in front of the Prsetorium, as his successor, Florus, did some 
years later.^ A great crowd had assembled whilst the trial was 
proceed ing,3 and apparently followed Christ when he was sent to 
Herod Antipas,^ who was then residing at the Asmonaean Palace.^ 

Christ having been condemned by the Roman Governor, 
was sentenced to be crucified. If he had been sentenced to 
death by the Sanhedrin, according to the Mosaic law, he would 
have been stoned (see p. 19); but, the Great Assembly having 
lost the power of capital punishment, Jewish methods of 
execution had been replaced by Roman. Crucifixion was the 
punishment reserved by the Romans for those to whom the 
honour of death by the sword was not granted ; and Christ was 
treated like ordinary highwaymen, robbers, slaves, and persons 
guilty of sedition. His crucifixion was an act of the Roman 
Government. According to common custom, execution followed 
quickly upon condemnation. He was handed over to a detach- 
ment of Roman soldiers, commanded by a centurion, and led 
away with two robbers ^ to Golgotha, to be crucified. '^ 

It has been suggested ^ that Pilate " chose Golgotha for the 

> See p. 22. 

'^ Josephus, Wars, ii, 14, § 8. 

3 This seems to be the meaning of Matt, xxvii, 17, "When therefore 
they were gathered together." 

* Luke xxiii, 7, 11 j cf. Acts iv, 27. Son of Herod the Great and 
Malthace, called Herod the Tetrarch in the New Testament. 

^ The palace was situated to the right of the street leading from Herod's 
palace to the Temple. 

® Tlie robbers (Aycrraf) crucified with Christ were brigands, freebooters, or 
outlaws, and must not be confounded with thieves (/cAcirroi,— so in John x, S, 
'* thieves and robbers,*' kXsvtou k. Xyarai). Thus Josephus calls Hezekias, 
who was subdued by Herod the Great, and Eleazar, "arch-robbers" 
(&pX'Xy(7Ta(, Wcws, ii, 4, § 1 ; 13, § 2) ; and those with them and with Simon, 
" robbers " ( Wars, ii, 4, § 2 ; 13, § 2). In the Bible the word is applied to 
Barabbas (John xviii, 40). 

7 Matt, xxvii, 31-33 ; Mark xv, 20-22 ; Luke xxiii, 26-33 ; John xix, 

^ Canon McColl, in Quarterly Statement, 1901, p. 288, ». 2. 


Crucifixion for the purpose of insulting them (the Jews), not in 
order to fulfil their law." There is, however, no indication of 
motive on the part of Pilate in the Bible narrative. No instruc- 
tions to the centurion with regard to the place of execution are 
mentioned. There is only the simple statement that Pilate 
" delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified." ^ 
From this statement it may be inferred, perhaps, that the 
military authorities, to whom Christ was transferred for 
execution, were allowed to carry out the ordinary pimishment 
for sedition where they pleased.^ In this case it is most probable 
that the selection of the place of execution was made by the 
centurion, and that his choice of Golgotha was accidental, or dic- 
tated by motives of convenience ; and that it was not intentional, 
or due to any desire on the part of Pilate to insult the Jews. 

There is an old tradition that the procession to Golgotha 
passed through the streets of Jerusalem, then thronged with Jews 
who had come up for the Passover. But whether the tradition refers 
to the ^^ drcumferrey^^ which the Eomans considered an essential 
part of the punishment, or to a temporary transfer from Herod's 
palace to the Antonia, as suggested above (see p. 31), or to the 
visit to Herod Antipas, is uncertain. The route of the procession 
depends upon the site of the Prsetorium, which is not certainly 
known. But modem tradition is clearly at fault in identifying 
the first part of the Via Dolorosa with a street that lies above the 
ditch which, at the time of the Crucifixion, must have protected 
the Antonia, and the second wall.^ 

Golgotha, the scene of the Crucifixion, was, according to the 
Bible, outside the city walls ^ and " nigh to the city." ^ The spot 

^ Mark xy, 16 ; cf. Matt, xxvii, 26; Luke xxiii, 25 ; John xix, 16. 

^ See p. 22. According to Benan (Vie de Jesus, 16th ed., p. 428), 
sentences on those condemned for sedition, as Christ was, were also carried 
out by the soldiers. 

' The condemned person, on his way to execution, was led through the 
principal streets and exposed to insult and injury. 

« See Chapter XI. 

» " Without the gate " (Heb. xiii, 12, 13 j cf. Matt, xxvii, 32 ; Mark xv, 
20 ; John xix, 17). That is, outside the second wall. 

< John xix, 20. 


was near a frequented thoroughfare leading from one of the 
city gates to the country,^ and was visible from "afar," 2 and 
presumably from some place whence the chief priests, scribes, 
and elders could look on, and revile, without the risk of incurring 
ceremonial defilement.^ In the place (eV rw toVoj) where he was 
crucified there was a garden (idJTros) ; and in the garden a " new 
tomb, wherein was never man yet laid," that belonged to Joseph 
of Arimathea.'* This may mean that the garden was a com- 
paratively small enclosure ^ within the limits or area of the place 
(o jovosi) called Golgotha. 

The Bible narrative, it will be seen, gives no indication of the 
direction of Golgotha with regard to the city,® or with reference 
to any feature connected with it. It does not mention the 
position of the gate ^ by which Christ passed out of the city, or 
the name of the place to which the frequented thoroughfare led. 
It states, it is true, that the spot was " nigh to the city," and 
visible from " afar," but these statements are not conclusive 
evidence of position, since the words " nigh " {e^^yvs),^ and " afar " 

1 Matt, xxvu, 39 ; Mark xv, 21, 29 ; Luke xxiii, 26. 

* Matt, xxvii, 55 ; Mark xv, 40 ; Luke xxiii, 49. 

* Matt, xxvii, 41 ; Mark xv, 31 ; John xviii, 28. 

^ Matt, xxvii, 60 ; Mark xv, 46 ; Luke xxiii, 53 ; John xix, 41. 

" An enclosed garden (/c^iros KeKKeifffikvos) is mentioned in the Song of 
Solomon (iv, 12). The word G-olgotha is used by some early vrriters to 
denote the actual spot where the crosses were erected, and a larger area 
round that spot, including the place where the crosses were found. 

* There may be, however, an indication of position in Heb. xiii, 11, 12. 
" For the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the holy place 
by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned without the camp. 
Wherefore Jesus, also, that he might sanctify the people through his own 
blood, suffered without the gate." The late Bishop Gobat of Jerusalem 
held that this was the case, and maintained that as the sin offering in the 
Temple was slain on the north side of the altar, so Christ, the Antitype, was 
crucified north of the same altar, when he suffered without the gate. 

^ Whether Paul had any particular gate in his mind is imcertain. At 
Bome, condemned criminals left the city by the Esquiline Gate, and at 
Athens by the Charonian Gate. According to a mediseyal tradition, Christ, 
bearing his cross, passed out by the Porta Judicaria, 

^ John uses the same word to define the relative positions of the tomb 
and the cross (xix, 42) ; of Christ, when walking on the lake, and the boat 
(yi, 19) ; and of Bethany and Jerusalem (xi, 18). In Acts the Mount of 



{fuiKp60€v\^ as used in the New Testament, appear to have no 
very definite meaning. It has been suggested ^ that the transfer 
of the cross to Simon, at or just outside the city gate,^ may 
indicate that Golgotha was not near at hand ; but this is not 
very apparent. The transfer of the cross was unusual, but it 
may well be supposed that the Lord, after all his sufferings, 
mental and physical, sank beneath the burden,^ and that the 
soldiers, impatient of delay, impressed a man, coming from the 
opposite direction, who met the procession as it left the city. 
Or the transfer may have been due to humane considerations on 
the part of the centurion. 

It would appear, then, that the only certain facts to be 
gathered from the Bible narrative are : that Christ was crucified 
outside the city, and, in accordance with Roman custom, close to 
a public thoroughfare ; and that in the place where he was 
crucified there was a garden which contained a new rock-hewn 
tomb.^ Golgotha was evidently so well known that it was not 
necessary to define its position more precisely. The garden was 
most probably a rock-terrace (see p. 26) planted with fruit trees, 
such as the olive, fig, and vine, or with trees that gave a grateful 
shade; the entrance to the tomb would naturally be in the 

Olives is said to be nigh to Jerusalem (Acts i, 12), and Ljdda to Joppa 
(Acts ix, 38). See also Luke xix, 11; John iii, 23; vi, 23; xi, 54; 
Acts xxvii, 8. The word appears to be used as a pleonasm, like fiaKp60e¥. 

^ A late Greek word and well-known pleonasm. It is used to define the 
relative positions of Peter and Christ on the way from G-ethsemane to the 
House of Caiaphas (Matt, xxvi, 58 ; Mark xiv, 54 ; Luke xxii, 64) ; of Christ 
and the fig tree (Mark xi, 13) ; of the Pharisee and the pubUcan in the 
Temple (Luke xviii, 13) ; and of Dives and Lazarus (Luke xvi, 33). See 
also Mark v, 6 ; viii, 3. 

^ Gautier, in Quarterly Statementy 1902, p. 78. 

3 This is the usual explanation of the expression " as they came out *' 
(Matt, xxvii, 32) ; but the words may refer to the departure of the pro- 
cession from the Prsetorium. 

* The language of Mark xv, 22, they "bring him " (kou (^fpov<riv aifrbv), 
literally "bear him,** to Golgotha, seems to imply this. 

* " The grave of Jesus Christ and Golgotha lay near each other, or, 
properly, the garden with the grave, which belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, 
the Jewish Councillor, was situated at the place called Golgotha.** (Guthe, 
in Hauck's Sealencifklopddie, Art. " Grab, das heilige.'*) 

C 2 


vertical face or edge of the next higher-lying terrace ; and upon 
this higher terrace the crosses may have been erected. The 
topographical features of Golgotha were, probably, not unlike 
those represented in the accompanying illustrations. In the 
fore-ground of each is the top or floor of a rock-terrace — the 
garden (Kfjiros) — ^upon which, in one instance, wheat or barley 
has been grown ; and in the back-ground of each is the vertical 
face or edge of the next higher-lying terrace with the mouths 
of several rock-hewn tombs. It may be remarked that a family 
tomb in a garden is mentioned in connection with the burials of 
Manasseh and Amon. 

Tombs with terrace oardkxs t.\ iroxt. 

Xo. 2.—" Ik thk Valxky of Hini 



On the Position of certain Places mentioned in the 
Bible Narrative — Gethsemane — The House of 
Caiaphas— The Hall of the Sanhedrin — The Pr^e- 


The evidence available for the indentification of the places 
mentioned in the Bible narrative is, unfortunately, in no case 
conclusive. But some statement with regard to it seems a 
necessary preliminary to a discussion of the position of Golgotha. 
Gethsemane is called by Matthew (xxvi, 36), and Mark 
(xiv, 32), " a place,'' or, more accurately, as in Revised Version 
margin, " an enclosed piece of ground " {x*^P^^^) > ^ *"^ ^7 John 
(xviii, 1) "a garden," or orchard (<c;/7ro9).2 Luke (xxii, 40) uses 
the indefinite term "the place " (toVo?), to signify the spot where 
what he narrates occurred. No descriptive details are given in 
the Bible, but the Hebrew name, " an oil press," and the expres- 
sions " went in " and " went out " {ei<rtj\eeu and ef //X^ei/, John 
xviii, 1, 4) seem to indicate that the place was one of those 
terraces planted with olive trees, which form such a marked 
feature of the scenery in the hill country of Judaea. From the 
fourth century, possibly from the date of the Empress Helena's 
visit to Jerusalem, in a.d. 326, Gethsemane has been shown 
at the foot of the Mount of Olives. Proximity to the Kidron 
may perhaps be inferred from John xviii, 1, 2, and is considered 
by Stanley^ and others to be an argument in favour of the 

* The word xo^P^ov is translated " parcel of ground " in John ix, 5 ; " field " 
(called Akeldama) in Acts 1, 18, 19 ; "land" (of Ananias) in Acts y, 3, 8; 
and ** lands," in the plural, in Acts iy, 34. 

^ The same word is used by John (xix, 41) for the garden in the place 
where Christ was cracified and buried. 

' Sinai and Palestine, p. 456. 


traditional site. But a comparison of the statements in Luke 
xxi, 37, and xxii, 39, has led some authorities to believe that the 
garden was higher up the mount. This view derives some sup- 
port from the early tradition that Christ taught the Apostles in 
a cave near the summit of the Moimt of Olives. Thus Eusebius ^ 
mentions a cave, near the top of the hill, where Jesus prayed, 
and this may be the " sacred cave " over which Constantino built 
a church ; ^ but he simply describes Gethsemane as an " enclosed 
piece of ground " at the Mount of Olives where the faithful used 
to pray.3 The Bordeaux Pilgrim (a.d. 333) saw " a stone at the 
place (apparently near the traditional Gethsemane) where Judas 
Iscariot betrayed Christ," and afterwards ascended "to the 
Mount of Olives, where, before the Passion, the Lord taught his 
disciples." Cyril * apparently distinguishes between Gethsemane, 
" where the betrayal happened," and the Mount of Olives, " on 
which they were that night praying." St. Sylvia (a.d. circa 385) 
seems to connect the "cave in which the Lord taught the 
Apostles" with the Church of the Ascension.^ Eucherius {circa 
A.D. 440) mentions two churches on the Mount — one at the 
place of the Ascension, the other where Christ talked to his 
disciples.^ The first to distinctly state that Gethsemane was 
" al the foot of the Mount of Olives " is Jerome.'' The general 
conclusion is that, although the authenticity of the traditional 
site cannot be proved, it is not impossible or improbable. 

The House of Caiaphas,^ with its uncovered courtyard^ 
and its porch,^^ closed by a door or gate,^^ was perhaps the official 

* Appendix IV., 8, lii. ^ Appendix V., 1, xx. 

* Lagarde, Onomastica Sacra^^ 248*®. 

* Catechetical Lectures, xiii, 38. 

* Palestine Pilgrinu^ Texts, vol. i. 

* Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. ii. 
7 Onomastica Sacred, 130^. 

^ abX'li m Matt, xxvi, 3, 58 ; Mark xiv, 64 ; John xviii, 15 ; and oIkos in 

Luke xxii, 54. 

9 Matt, xxvi, 69 ; Mark xiv, 66 ; Luke xxii, 55. 

^® m/Xwy, Matt, xxvi, 71, or vpoavXtov, Mark xiv, 68. It is uncertain 
whether the word used by Mark refers to a forecourt or to a porch. 

^* dvpct, John xviii, 16 ; cf, the gate of the porch of Mary's house. Acts xii, 
13, 14. 

No. 2.— David's Toiv 



residence of the high priest. It was probably not far distant 
from the Temple and the hall in which the Sanhedrin sat ; and 
it may have been the same place as the house (oiKosf) of Ananias, 
the high priest, which was situated, apparently, near the 
Asmoniean palace, and was destroyed by the insurgents during 
the tumult that commenced the war with Rome.^ 

In the houses of the wealthy the public and private apart- 
ments were built round a paved court, and this was entered from 
the street through a porch, or passage, which was closed by a 
heavy door, and had a room on one side for the porter and 
attendants. In some instances the houses had a forecourt and 
an inner court, and this appears to have been the case in 
that of Caiaphas. It may be inferred, from a comparison of 
Matt, xxvi, 57-75; Mark xiv, 53-68; Luke xxii, 54-61 ; John 
xviii, 12-27, that Caiaphas and Annas lived in the same house, 
in which both, doubtless, had their own separate apartments. 

The Hall of the Sanhedrin. — The Sanhedrin, or Great 
Council, at Jerusalem consisted of 70 members — chief priests- 
scribes, and elders, with the high priest as president. Under 
the Eomans it could try important cases, and pass sentences of 
death,^ but they were not valid until confirmed by the Eoman 
procurator.* The Great Council originally sat, on ordinary 
days, in a stone hall ^ (lishkath horGazith) in the inner court, on 
the south side of the Temple ; and on Sabbaths and festivals in 
the Temple synagogue— in the diel between the outer court and 
the court of the women.^ But 40 years before the destruction 
of Jerusalem, or, more probably, when Archelaus was deposed, 

1 Josephus^ WarSj ii, 17, § 6. 

' The chief priests included those who had held the office of high priest 
and had been deposed, and influential members of the families from which 
the high priests were selected. 

3 Matt, y, 22. 

^ John xyiii, 31 ; Josephus, Ant.^ xx, 9, § 1. 

' According to the Talmud of Babylon, Yoma, the hall was in the form 
of a large basilica. Here alone, according to the old law, sentence of death 
could be pronounced. 

* Maimonides, Sanhedrin, 3. 


and the first Eoman governor was appointed (a.d. 7), the right 
to inflict capital punishment was withdrawn, and the Sanhedrin 
transferred its sittings to ** the sheds," or " trade halls." ^ These 
"halls," or "market," in which people bought and sold, and 
where the "tables of the money-changers" (Matt, xxi, 12; 
Mark xi, 15; Luke xix, 45) probably stood, must have been 
in the outer court, or precincts of the Temple. And that 
part of them in which the Sanhedrin sat was perhaps the 
same place as the "Council House" {povXrj)^ which, according 
to Josephus, lay between the Xystus and the western portico 
of the Temple.2 The "Council House" must, from the nature 
of the ground, have been on the Temple Mount, and either 
within the Temple precincts, or partly within them, and partly 
on the bridge which connected the Temple with the Xystus,^ 
near Wilson's Arch (see plan). The view that the Sanhedrin was 
sitting in the " Council House " when Christ was brought before 
it, seems, however, to conflict with the statement in Matt, xxvii, 5, 
which apparently indicates, though not certainly, that when 
Judas cast down the pieces of silver, the members of the 

* Talmud of Babylon, Ahoda Zara 8, b., f . 8 ; ei consedit in tabemis, 
Lightfoot, in Mat 6. xxvi, 3, p. 370. Edersheim (Life and Times of Jesus ^ 
Bk. iii, cb. v) identifies the " halls " or " Temple Market *' with the " BazArs 
of the sons of Annas " mentioned in Rabbinical writings, and locates them 
in a part of the Temple Court. He suggests that the Sanhedrin sat '* in 
the private locale attached to these very bazars/' and that there the 
condemnation of Christ "may have been planned if not actually pro- 

' The first wall extended " to the Xystus, and then, joining the Council 
House, ended at the western portico of the Temple " (Josephus, Wars, v. 
4, § 2. As Schiirer remarks (Kistory of the Jewish People^ II., i, p. 190, Jf., 
£ng. ed.), the Council House must have been on the Temple Mount, as 
there was nothing between the Temple and the Xystus but a bridge. It 
could not have been in the upper city, for the Eomans destroyed the 
fiovXtvT-ftpiov (=fiov\-fi) before they took that part of the city (TFars, ri, 6, 
§ 3). Schiirer argues that lishkath ha-Gazith means that the hall was so 
named because it was near the Xystus, and not because it was built of 
wrought stones, which would hardly be a characteristic feature. 

3 Wars, ii, 16, § 3. This was one of the principal approaches to the 
Temple, and the point at which it entered would be a convenient place for 
the money-changers, &c. 


Sanhedrin were in the naoSf^ or sanctuary, and not in the 
outer courts or precincts. 

The PRiETORiUM was originally the tent of the Praetor in a 
Boman camp, but the word was afterwards applied to the official 
residence of the Governor or Procurator of a Eoman province ; 
and, in the New Testament, it denotes the official residence of the 
Eoman Governor in Jerusalem. Amongst the Eomans it was cus- 
tomary for the governors of provinces to appropriate to their own 
use the palaces in which the kings and princes had formerly dwelt. 
Thus in Sicily the Propraetor lived in the castle or palace of 
Hiero;2 and at Caesarea the Procurator occupied Herod's 
Praetorium^ (Palace). It is impossible to believe that Pilate, 
when staying at Jerusalem for the transaction of public business, 
did not follow the usual custom, and select as his residence the 
magnificent palace that Herod had built for himself in the Upper 
City.^ It would have been derogatory to the dignity of an 
official of his rank to live in a building of less importance, and 
his neglect to occupy it would have been regarded in an Oriental 
country as a sign of weakness. His occupation of the palace is 
implied by the statement that he insulted the Jews by hanging 
inscribed shields in it;^ by the circumstances attending the 
tumult which followed his application of the Corban to the 
construction of an aqueduct ; ® and by the presence of his wife, 
who would not have lodged in the Antonia, which was inferior 
as a residence, and was the headquarters of the legion that 

* The word naos (ya6s), usually applied to the actual Temple, in this 
casa evidently includes the inner couTt which is generally considered to 
hare formed part of the Aicron, or Temple with its courts. Possibly nao9 
may not accurately represent the original Aramaic of Matthew. 

' Cicero, Oratio in Verrem^ II., v, 12, 30. 
' Acts xiiii, 36, xxv, 23. 

* Josephus, Ant.y xv, 9, § 3; Wara^ i, 21, § 1, v, 4, § 4. 

^ iv Tols 'Hpioiov fiatriXclois, Fhilo, Legatio ad Caium, § 38. 

® Josephus, Ant.f xviii, 3, § 2 ; Wars, ii, 9, § 4. Kreyenbiihl has shown 
(^Zeitschrift fur die NeuesteatamentUche Wissenschaft^ 1902, pp. 15^.) that 
the tumult could only have occurred in front of Herod's palace ; and 
as Pilate was seated on the hema when he g>ive the signal to his soldiers 
which caused the disturbance^ it is a fair inference that he was living in the 
palace at the time. 


garrisoned Jerusalem.^ It may also be remarked that the 
Antonia is called ** the barracks " (wapefiftoXri, Ee vised Version, 
" castle "), and not the Praetorium, in the only passages in the 
Bible that allude to it ; ^ and that there is no certain instance of 
the application of the word praetorium to a camp or barracks.^ 
If the Antonia was the Praetorium, it is difficult to explain John 
xviii, 28. As a crowd was not allowed to enter the castle, there 
could have been no fear of ceremonial defilement. Possibly the 
expression ?) av\r) u itmi/ Trpanwpiov^ should be translated 
"the palace which is the Praetorium." At a later date 
(a.d. 66) Gessius Florus, Pilate's successor, certainly occupied 
Herod's palace,^ and " set up his judgment seat {bemay ^ijfia) in 
front of it, and took his seat thereon. Then the chief priests and 
persons of influence .... came up and stood before the 
judgment seat." ® From this interesting passage it would appear 
that there was an open space in front of the palace, possibly 
adjoining, or opening on to the "upper agora" of Josephus, 
where the governor sat to administer justice. Probably the 
bemoL was usually set up on the same spot,'' and if the palace was 
the Praetorium, that spot may have been a small raised platform, 
with a tessellated or mosaic pavement, which was called in 
Aramaic Gahbatluiy and in Greek Lithostroton, 

Although the evidence in favour of the identification of the 
Praetorium with Herod's palace is very strong, it must not be 
forgotten that a tradition, at least as old as the fourth century, 
places "the house or Praetorium of Pilate" to the east of the 
Church of the Holy Sepulchre. 

I Wars, V, 5, § 8,; cf. Ant., xv, 11, §§ 4, 7. 

- Acts xxi, 34, 37 ; xxii, 24 ; xxiii, 10, 16, 32. 

^ See the argument of Bishop Lightfoot in EpUtle to the Philippiatu^, 
p. 99. 

^ Mark xv, 16. Josephus (Wars, y, 4, § 4) calls Herod's palace 
7/ rou fiofftKtws avKrj, and the palace of the Emperor is an aiXii (IrenaeuB in 
EusebiuB, Historia Ecclesiastica, y, 20, § 5). 

^ The palace was occupied by Sabinus during the rising when Archelaus 
was Ethnarch {WarSy ii, 3, § 2; Awt.y xyii, 10, § 2). 

« Wars, ii, 14, § 8. 

7 On one occasion Pilate had the hema placed in the great stadium at 
Jerusalem {WarSy ii, 9, § 3). 

No. 2. — Thb "Ecce Ho3io" A. 


The Bordeaux Pilgrim/ passing northward along the main 
street of Jerusalem, had the basilica of Constantine on his left 
hand, and on his right, " below in the valley," the ruins of " the 
house or praetorium of Pontius Pilate." Possibly Cyril ^ alludes 
to the same place as the " Praetorium of Pilate now laid waste." 
Peter the Iberian (Georgian), Bishop of Maiumas in the fifth 
century, on leaving Golgotha " went down to the church, which 
is called that of Pilate, and thence to that of the Paralytic," on 
his way to Gethsemane. He thus places the Church of Pilate ^ 
between the Sepulchre and the Church of St. Anne.'* The sixth 
century tradition was that the Church of St. Sophia occupied the 
site of Pilate^s house, or the Praetorium;^ and, according to 
Sepp,^ the " Dome of the Kock," in the Harslm esh-Sherlf, is, in 
great part, the original Church of St. Sophia, built on the site of 
the Praetorium. Clermont-Ganneau," on the other hand, identi- 
fies the Praetorium with the Antonia, and holds that the Church 
of St. Sophia, which succeeded the Church of Pilate mentioned 
by Peter the Iberian, stood on the site now occupied by the 
Turkish barracks. 

The existence of this tradition, at a time when the towers of 
Herod's palace were standing, and the Antonia had long dis- 
appeared, certainly points to a very early belief that the latter 
place was connected in some way or other with the events which 
led up to the Crucifixion. Cumanus, at the time of the feast 
of unleavened bread, strongly reinforced the garrison in the 
Antonia, and was himself either in the castle or on the porticoes 
of the Temple.^ Pilate may have also gone to the castle for the 
day, and have set up his bema on the open paved space between 

* Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. L 
^ Catechetical Lectures, xiii, 39. 

' Possibly on the site now occupied by the Armenian Church of the 

* Pierre Vlberien, in Revue de V Orient Latin, iii, p. 382. 

^ The Breyiaiy of Jerusalem; Theodosius; Antoninus Martyr; see 
Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. ii. 

^ Jeras%lem und des Heilige Land, p. 355 ff, 
7 Secueil (VArcheologie Ortentale, iii, p. 2'28ff. 
^ JosepUuB, Ant,, xx, 5, § 3 ; Wars, ii, 12, § 1. 


the Antonia and the Temple.^ On the other hand, it is possible 
that Christ, after the trial and judgment at Herod's palace, was 
handed over to the soldiers for execution ; and that, in the first 
place, the centurion led him through the streets to the Antonia, 
and then, after receiving the two robbers from the commandant, 
passed on to Golgotha. 

With our present knowledge, the conclusion must be that the 
position of the Prsetorium of the Gospels cannot be certainly 
ascertained. An identification with Herod's palace is supported 
by Alford, Edersheim, Ewald, Fiirrer, Grimm, Guthe, Keim, 
KreyenbUhl, Schiirer, Sepp, Spiess, Tobler, Winer, &c. ; whilst 
the Antonia is preferred by Caspari, Clermont-Ganneau, ICrafft, 
Miihlau, Swete, Tischendorf, Weiss, Westcott, &c. 

^ Josephug, JFarSf vi, 1, § 8 ; 3, § 2. Some writers identify this paved 
space with the LUhostroton of the G-ospels. 



The Arguments in Favour of the Authenticity of the 

Traditional Sites. 

The absence of any definite statement in the Bible with regard 
to the position of Golgotha has led to much curious speculation 
since a.d. 1738, when Jonas Korte vigorously attacked the authen- 
ticity of the traditional site, and gave wider currency to doubts 
that had previously been expressed. The scene of the Crucifixion 
has been placed north, south, east, and west of the city ; but the 
more important authorities are now agreed that it must have 
been some spot (outside the second wall of Josephus), which was 
situated on the small plateau that lies between the Kidron and 
Hinnom valleys. According to tradition, the ground upon which 
Constantino built his great churches^ fulfils these conditions, 
and it is necessary, in the first place, to consider carefully and 
impartially everything that may be advanced in favour of or 
against the authenticity of this tradition. Was the official 
recovery of Golgotha based upon any certain tradition ? Is there 
anything in the form of the ground which is not in accordance 
with the Bible narrative ? Was the traditional site outside the 
second wall ? These are some of the questions which arise for 

The advocates of the view that the two traditional sites now 
shown as Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre are authentic, support 
their opinion by the following arguments : ^ — 

1. It is obvious from the Bible narrative that the positions of 
Golgotha and the Tomb were known to the friends and enemies 

^ It is unnecessarj to discuss the theory of Fergusson that the churches 
were on the eastern hill, for they are dearly shown on the western in the 
Madeba mosaic (see Plate IX). 

^ The statement has heen compiled from the works of Ohateauhriand, 
Williams, Mommert, and other writers. 


of Jesus who were at Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion, 
and it is certain that many of those persons were alive when, 
ten years later, Herod Agrippa (a.d. 41-43) built the third or 
outer wall of defence on the north side of the city. 

2. The construction of Agrippa's wall brought the two sites 
within the limits of the walled city, but, as the Jews regarded 
tombs ^ as unclean, no houses were built above them. Moreover, 
the existence of buildings in such close proximity to the second 
wall would have been prejudicial to its defence, and their erection 
would not have been permitted. The holy places thus remained 
bare and unoccupied, and could not have been forgotten before 
the city was besieged by Titus. 

3. In obedience to the warning of Jesus,^ the members of the 
Christian community fled from Jerusalem {circa A.D. 67-68) 
before the siege commenced, and established themselves at Pella. 
When Titus, whose destruction of the city was not complete, left 
for Rome, most of the Christians returned, and settled down 
amongst the ruins, after having been absent three or four years. 
Since the altitude of the holy places was slightly greater than 
that of the ground upon which the second wall stood — and their 
distance from the third wall was appreciable — they could not 
have been materially altered in appearance during the progress of 
the siege. Even supposing that they had been covered by one of 
the mounds of the besiegers, the sites would not have been lost. 
The Christians during their short absence could not have com- 
pletely forgotten the exact positions of places so intimately 
connected with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. 
Many of them, men and women, had passed their lives at 
Jerusalem ; some had probably witnessed the Crucifixion ; and 
one at least (Simeon, son of Clopas, a cousin of the Lord's), 
suffered martyrdom in the reign of Trajan (circa a.d. 108) at the 
reputed age of 120 years. Further, the unaltered nature of the 
ground after the siege is indicated by the circumstance that 
Hadrian, when he erected a Temple of Venus on the spot {circa 

^ Golgotha being the reputed tomb of Adam. 
2 Matt, xxiv, 16, 16. 


A.D. 135-136) carried out no demolition, and removed no rubbish, 
but was obliged to fill up hollows, and obtain a level platform 
by bringing the necessary material from a distance. 

4. Nothing is known to have occurred during the interval that 
elapsed between the return from Pella and the suppression of the 
revolt of the Jews in the reign of Hadrian, which would justify 
the belief that all trace of the holy places had been obliterated, 
or that the Christians, whose numbers were steadily increasing, 
had forgotten their position. Simeon, son of Clopas, a contem- 
porary of the death and resurrection of Jesus, who succeeded 
the Apostle James as Bishop of Jerusalem, lived to the first 
decade of the second century, and he was followed by thirteen 
Bishops of Hebrew origin, who would not have allowed a know- 
ledge of the position of the holy places to die out. 

5. The tradition with regard to the positions of Golgotha 
and the Tomb was thus continuous from the date of the Cruci- 
fixion to the time when Hadrian founded the Eoman colony of 
^lia on the ruins of Jerusalem, and a temple of Venus was 
built above the Sepulchre of Christ. By the erection of the 
temple — an act of profanation which in itself shows that the 
two places were then honoured by Christians — the holy places 
were completely concealed, but their position was definitely 
marked for all time, and they were preserved from injury. 

6. After the foundation of -<^lia, the city was visited by 
pilgrims from all parts of the world, and it became a matter of 
common knowledge that the holy places lay beneath the paved 
platform upon which the temple of Venus stood. When, there* 
fore, Constantine decided to recover the sites, and build churches 
in their honour, it was only necessary to demolish the temple and 
clear away the made ground beneath it. Eusebius, a contem- 
porary, expresses no surprise at the recovery of the sites in his 
account of the circumstance : his remark ^ that " contrary to all 
expectation," the "venerable and hallowed monument of Our 
Lord's Resurrection " was rendered visible by the clearance of the 
superincumbent soil, is a natural expression of astonishment at 

^ Appendix V., I., iv. 


the preservation of the Tomb during so many years, and has no 
reference to a miraculous discovery. Parallel cases in modern 
times are the discoveries of Dr. Schliemann at Troy, and of 
Mr. Arthur Evans in Crete, both of which may be described as 
being " contrary to all expectation." 

It will be observed that the above arguments involve the 
assumption that Golgotha and the Tomb were objects of 
reverence, or at least of interest, to the Christians from the date 
of the Resurrection to the time of Constantine; that the tra- 
dition with regard to their position was continuous throughout 
that period ; and that the ground now occupied by the Church 
of the Holy Sepulchre was outside the second wall. This 
assumption raises three questions, each of which requires 
separate discussion — the possibility, or otherwise, of a continuous 
tradition ; the attitude of the early Christians towards the holy 
places ; and the course of the seamd wall. The last question is 
in the main topographical and archaeological, the first two are for 
the most part historical ; and it is necessary to inquire what light 
is thrown upon them by the history of Jerusalem and its Church 
during the period a.d. 33-326, so far as it is known. 



History of Jerusalem a.d. 33-326. 

At the time of the Crucifixion (a.d. 29 or 33) Judaea was 
governed by a Roman official of equestrian rank, styled procu- 
rator,^ who resided at Caesarea, and was to a certain extent 
subordinate to the Imperial Legate of Syria. The governor 
was invested with the military command, and a corps of auxiliary 
troops, raised from the non- Jewish inhabitants of Palestine — 
the Jews being exempted from military service — was placed at 
his disposal for the maintenance of order. He was also the 
supreme judicial authority, and decided matters of life and 
death, except in the case of Roman citizens, who could appeal 

Fig. 2.— Coins of Pontius Pilate, a.d. 32-33. 

to the emperor. The administration of the civil law was to a 
great extent left in the hands of the Sanhedrin ; and this was 
also the case with the criminal law, excepting that death 
sentences required the confirmation of the procurator. The 
Jewish worship was tolerated ; great deference was paid to the 
religious opinions and prejudices of the Jews ; the worship of 
the emperor was never enforced ; and the copper coins struck by 
the procurators bore only the name of the emperor and inoffen- 
sive emblems.2 The Christians were regarded originally by the 
Roman officials as a Jewish sect, and, to a certain extent, they 

^ For a list of the Procurators, see Appendix IV., 1. 
^ Madden, The Coins of the Jetoa ; Caignart de Saulcj, Numismatique 
de la Terre Saint e. 



benefited by the freedom granted to the Jewish religion. Until 
the reign of Nero ^ their persecutors were the Jews, and not the 
Eomans. At Jerusalem one of the results of the Roman policy 
was to throw great power into • the hands of the Sadducees or 
higher clergy, at the head of whom was the high-priestly family 
of Ananus. This power was often abused, and when, as in the 
reign of Caligula, the administrative services were demoralised, 
it was used to persecute the Christians. It was apparently at 
such a period that Stephen was martyred (a.d. 37 or 38), and 
that persecution drove many Christians from Jerusalem. 

In A.D. 41, Herod Agrippa was appointed by the Emperor 
Claudius king of the territory over which Herod the Great had 
reigned, and the force of auxiliaries was transferred to him. 
Herod, who observed the Jewish religion strictly, and endeavoured 
in every way to conciliate the Jews, was naturally hostile to the 
Christians, but it was only towards the close of his reign that 
he became a violent persecutor. Early in a.d. 44 he killed 
James, the son of Zebedee, with the sword, and imprisoned 
Peter.2 Shortly afterwards he died at Csesarea. During his 
reign the third or outer wall of defence was commenced.^ Its 
course is not certainly known, but there can be no doubt that 
the traditional sites of Golgotha and the Tomb were enclosed 
by it. Those sites evidently formed part of an ancient Jewish 
cemetery, and there is every reason to believe that, in view of 
the state of Jewish feeling at that period, they were not occupied 
by buildings. 

On the death of Herod the government was resumed by 
Rome, and Cuspius Fadus was appointed procurator. He was 
followed by a succession of governors whose maladministration 
and cruelty gave rise to the disorders and popular tiunults that 
culminated in the war with Rome and the destruction of Jeru- 

' The persecution of Nero was local and transient. It did not extend to 
Palestine. The Christians at Borne were accused of incendiarism, and 
punished for their hatred of mankind {odium generis humani, Tacitus, 
Annals, xt, 38-44). 

* Acts xii, 1-4. 

3 Josephus, WarSj >% 4, § 2. See Chapter XI. 


salem. The Christians no doubt suffered as much as the Jews from 
the brutality of the governors, but Christianity played no part 
in the disturbances. During one period of anarchy, between the 
death of Festus (a.d. 61) and the arrival of Albinus (a.d. 62), 
when the high priest Ananus ^ was in power, James, the brother 
of the Lord, and the head of the Jerusalem Church, was possibly 
killed.2 The war broke out in A.D. 66, and, during its progress,^ 
some time before the commencement of the siege of Jerusalem 
(April, A.D. 70), the Christians fled to Pella,* a city of Decapolis with 
a mixed population in which the Greek element preponderated. 
Only 35 years had elapsed since the Crucifixion, and it seems 
certain that several of the refugees, and possibly every Christian 
of mature age, knew the positions of Golgotha and the Tomb. 

Whilst the Christians were at Pella, Jerusalem was taken by 
Titus (August, A.D. 70), who is said to have ordered its complete 
destruction, with the exception of the three great towers con- 
nected with Herod's palace and a portion of the west wall. 
How far this order was carried out is uncertain. Josephus 
writes as if all the walls and houses, with the exception 
mentioned, were razed to the ground ; ^ but Eusebius is perhaps 
nearer the truth when he states ® that only half the city was 
destroyed. Those portions of Jerusalem which lay north of the 

' The son of the Ananus (Annas) Who was connected with the trial of 

^ Appendix IV., 8, i. The persecution in which James perished may 
hare been later, perhaps in a.d. 64 or 65. 

' Probably during the winter of a.d. 67-68, soon after the arrival in 
Jerusalem of John of Gischala (Not., a.d. 67) ; cf. Matt, ixiy, 20, " Pray ye 
that your flight be not in the winter." 

^ Pella (now Fahil^ east of Jordan; see Schumacher (Pella) ^ and 
Merrill {East of Jordan), originally a Greek military settlement, was 
taken and destroyed by Alexander Jannaeus because the people would not 
adopt Jewish customs. It was restored by Pompey, who granted it self- 
gOTemment and freedom from taxation ; and was attacked by the insurgent 
Jews at the commenceinent of the war of a.d. 66-70. When the Christians 
took refuge in the town, Galilee and Persea had been completely subdued by 
Yespa^ian. The flight is mentioned by Eusebius (Appendix TV., S, ii) and 
Epiphanius (Appendix lY., 9, ii). The Galilean Christians appear to hare 
taken refuge east of Jordan during the campaign in Galilee. 

* Wars, vi, 9, §§ 1, 4 ; vii, 1, § 1. « Appendix lY., 8, xi. 

D 2 


first wall, and those which lay on Mount Moriah and in the 
Tyropceon Valley, were the scene of much street fighting, and 
must have been practically destroyed during the progress of the 
siege. But the "Upper City," on the western spur, was not 
carried by assault. The Jews were seized with a panic when a 
breach was made in the west wall, near Herod's palace, and 
fled from the wall and from the towers. The Eomans entered 
without striking a blow, and though the place was sacked and 
fired by the soldiers,^ many houses must have remained intact. 
The military requirements of the Roman garrison necessitated 
some demolition; but there is no evidence that a plough was 
passed over the ruins, or that Titus ever intended that the 
city should never be rebuilt. Josephus would certainly have 
mentioned such an act of exauguration if it had taken place. 

After the capture of the capital, Judsea became an indepen- 
dent province, which was occupied by the celebrated Tenth 
Legion, Fretensis,^ and a body of " auxiliary troops of foreign 
origin, drawn in part from the farthest lands of the west." The 
province was retained by Vespasian as a private possession, 
and its revenue was paid to his privy purse ; ^ but lands in the 
vicinity of Jerusalem were granted to the Tenth Legion. The 
commander of the legion, who was usually of praetorian rank, 
was also the governor of the province, and resided, as the 
procurators had done, at Caesarea.* The legion, or the bulk of 
it, was quartered in the " Upper City," and, until the reign of 
Hadrian, Jerusalem was neither a colony nor a municipium, but 
a Roman legionary fortress or camp, with no power to strike 
coins. During this period (a.d. 70-132) there was no attempt 

^ Wars, Ti, S, §§ 4, 5. Several public buildings were destroyed before 
the siege, e,^., the house of Ananias, and the palaces of Agrippa and 
Berenike (TTor*, ii, 17, § 6). 

3 The Tenth Legion, with some troops of cavalry and cohorts of infantry 
(»^ar#,vii, 1, §2). 

3 Warg, vii, 6, § 6. 

* WarSy vii, 10, § 1. The names of only a few of the governors are known 
(Appendix lY., 2). Their position may be compared with that of the officers 
who are Governors and Commanders-in-Chief at Gibraltar, Malta, and 


at reconstruction, and no large buildings were erected. Beyond 
the levelled ground in the immediate vicinity of the " Camp " 
the walls of the fortifications, of the palaces, and of the houses 
lay as they had been left by Titus.^ A few heaps of ruins may 
have become overgrown with rank vegetation ; but there was 
nothing to prevent a person who had known the city before 
the siege from recognising any particular spot or street within 
the walls. The physical features underwent no change ; but here 
and there they may have been concealed by the debris of the city. 
The " Camp," or legionary fortress, was protected on the 
north and west by Herod's towers and portions of the first wall ; 
but of its limits on the south and east, and of its defences on 
those sides, nothing is known with certainty.^ The garrison 
must have consisted at first of the whole or of the greater 
part of the Tenth Legion,^ with a due proportion of auxiliaries, 
forming together a force of about 6,000 or 7,000 men. By the 
side of this force, but living apart from it in separate quarters 
(canab(x), there must have been a large miscellaneous population, 
possibly amoimting to 2,000 or 3,000, which consisted of camp 
followers, merchants, small traders and others who were attracted 
by the presence of a large permanent garrison. The total 
military and civil population a few years after the siege would 
thus be from 8,000 to 10,000. The quarter of the city inhabited 
by the latter is unknown, but it was probably the region of the 
bazars and that part of the " Upper City " which was not 
occupied by the legionary fortress* — a broad space being left 

* So Jerome writes, ** The ruins of the city stood for fifty years, until the 
time of the Emperor Hadrian (Epistola ad Uardanum, Migne, Patrologia 
Latina, xxii, col. 1,106). 

^ The size of the '* Camp " and its position in the city are discussed in 
Chapter XI. 

^ Many traces of the Tenth Legion hare been found at Jerusalem 
{QuaHerly Statement, 1871, p. 103 ; 1885, p. 133; 1886, pp. 21-24. 72, 73). 

^ Becent excayations have shown that the southern portion of the western 
spur was thickly populated in Roman times, and the finds include bricks with 
the stamp of the Tenth Legion {Revue Biblique, 1902, p. 274* ff,). Possibly 
this may indicate one quarter occupied by the civil population. See also 
tile of Tenth Legion found on the eastern slope of the same spur (Quarterly 
Statement, 1891, p. 20). 



between the fortifications of the " Camp *' and the nearest houses. 
After the complete suppression of the rebellion the Jews were 
not imkindly treated, possibly owing to the fact that Judsea had 
become Imperial property and to the relations between Titus 
and Berenike. No attempt was made to interfere with the great 
Eabbinical school at Jamnia, and no edict was issued forbidding 
Jews to visit or reside in Jerusalem. According to Basnage,^ 
families of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin were left in 
Jerusalem, and settled there to serve the Eoman garrison. In 
all probability those poverty-stricken Jews who had not been 
deported or sold by Titus, and those who had not compromised 
themselves by taking part in the war,^ were allowed to dwell 
in the unoccupied parts of the city. And here, too, amidst 
soldiers and civilians drawn from all parts of the known world, 
the Christians may have settled down on their return from Pella, 
making many converts and worshipping in a small building^ 
which in happier times was to become the ** Mother Church of 
Sion,*' the "mother of all the churches." 

In the " Camp " itself, so long as it remained a legionary 
fortress, there could have been no church, synagogue, or temple. 
The fact of the return from Pella is undoubted,* the date is 
unknown. Dr. Kobinson, following MUnter,^ places it after the 
suppression of the revolt in Hadrian's reign, and the foundation 
of ^lia.^ Renan considers it most probable that part of the 
church returned after the complete pacification of Judaea" {circa 

* Histoire des JuifSy vii, 9, § 11 ; 11, § 3. 

2 Possibly all devout Jews came to mourn over the ruins of the Temple 
and citj, purchasing liberty to do so from the soldiers. The numbers and 
prosperity of the Jews when the rebellion broke out under Hadrian, some 
sixty years later, shows that they could not have been greatly oppressed. 

^ According to Epiphanius (Appendix IV., 9, i), there was a church 
on Mount Sion in Hadrian's time, on the spot where the Disciples partook of 
the Supper after the Ascension. 

* The only distinct reference to the return is that by Epiphanius 
(Appendix IV., 9, ii). 

* Miinter, The Jewish War under Trajan and Hadrian, in Robinson's 
Bibliotheca Sacray 1843, p. 448. 

* Biblical Researches in Palestine, i, p. 371, edition of 1856. 

' Dr. Bobinson {Biblical Researches in Palestine, i, 367) characterises 
this view, when advanced by Chateaubriand {ItinSraire de Paris d Jerusalem, 


A.D. 73), but that the date may possibly have been as late as 
A.D. 122, when, according to him, Hadrian decided to rebuild 
Jerusalem as -^lia.^ The earlier date would seem the more 
probable and the more natural. There was nothing in the 
political condition of the country to prevent the return, and the 
Christians would hardly have neglected such a favourable field 
for missionary enterprise as that presented by the camp and its 
entourage. An early return may perhaps be inferred from the 
statement of Eusebius with regard to the election of Simeon, 
second Bishop of Jerusalem, in succession to James.^ Assuming 
that a small Christian community, with Simeon as Bishop, 
settled down amidst the ruins of the city about A.D. 72-75, the 
absence would have been at most seven years — a period far too 
short to blot out all remembrance of the positions of Golgotha 
and the Tomb. Even supposing that the Jerusalem Church did 
not exist, as a body, until A.D. 122, it is impossible to believe that 
the city was never visited between A.D. 72 and A.D. 122 by in- 
dividual Christians who were well acquainted with the holy places, 
and fully capable, had they so wished, of imparting their knowledge 
to others, and so perpetuating the tradition. The quotation of 
Eusebius from Hegesippus ^ that the " monument " (/) or/yX/;) of 
James " still remains by the Temple," implies a knowledge of 
Jerusalem after the siege by the Christians. On the whole, it 
seems to be a fair conclusion that the circumstances connected 
with the siege and with the residence of the Christians at Pella 
were not such as would have rendered a continuous tradition 
with regard to Golgotha and the Tomb impossible, either 
amongst the Jews or the Christians. 

Introduction, p. 124, Paris, A.D. 1837), as *' nothing more nor less than a mere 
figment of imagination '* ; but he brings forward no evidence in support of 
his own theory, nor is any supplied by Bishop Miinter. 

^ Les £vangile9y pp. 39, 56. 

* Appendix IV., 8, iii. The date of Simeon's accession is nowhere 
stated. Eusebius apparently places the accession after the capture of 
Jerusalem ; Lightfoat and others think that it took place immediately on 
the death of James, before the siege ; and Renan and others suppose that 
Simeon was elected after the return from Pella. 

' Appendix IV., 8, i. 


After the capture of Jerusalem every Jew over 20 years of 
age who wished to retain his religion was compelled to pay to the 
temple of Jupiter Capitolinus at Rome the tax of two drachmae 
(half a shekel), which formerly had been paid to the Temple 
of the Lord.^ The annual collection of this tax, rendered 
intolerable by the coins, bearing the head of the emperor, with 
which it was paid, must have kept alive a deep feeling of resent- 
ment amongst the Jews. Under Domitian the tax was collected 
with great harshness, and Christians of Jewish origin suffered 
equally with the Jews.^ Some alleviation, possibly in the 
method of collection, was granted by Nerva,^ but the country 
seems to have remained in an unsettled state throughout the 
reign of Trajan. A few minor outbreaks were suppressed, and 
order was completely restored in the first year of Hadrian,* 
A.D. 117. The Jews subsequently remained quiet, waiting for 
an opportunity, imtil A.D. 132, when they broke out in open 
revolt under the leadership of Bar Koziba (Cozeba)^ or Bar 
Kokba (Cocheha). 

According to Dion Cassius,^ the cause of the rebellion was 
Hadrian's decision to rebuild Jerusalem as a heathen city, and 
to erect a temple of Jupiter Capitolinus on the site of the Jewish 
Temple. Spartianus, on the other hand,^ gives as the reason 
the issue of Hadrian's edict forbidding the practice of circum- 

* Appendix IV., 4, i ; Josephus, Wars, vii, 6, § 6 ; cf. Matt xyii, 24. 

^ The decisiye test was circumcision, and, in cases of doubt. Christians 
of Jewish origin were publicly examined before a tribunal (Suetonius, 
in Domitianum, § 12). The tax was probably paid in denarii, PL Til., Fig. 2. 

^ The clemency of Nerva was apparently commemorated by a coin 
bearing the legend FISCI IVDAICI CALVMNIl SUBLATA (Keinach, 
Jewish Coins, PI. VII., 1). 

^ The final act appears to have been the capture of Lydda by Lusius 
Quietus, followed by a great slaughter of the Jews. 

' The name probably comes from the town of Cliezib, or Ghozeba ; after 
Bar Eoziba's failure and death it was interpreted as '* son of a lie." The 
name Bar Kokba, " son of a star," which appears in Christian writers, has 
reference to Balaam's prophecy in Num. xxiv, 17. For the Jewish 
traditions, see Jewish Encyelopetdia, Art. " Bar Kokba." 

' Appendix IV., 4, ii. 

' Appendix IV., 5. 


cision — an edict which applied to non-Jewish as well as to 
Jewish people. Eusebius says ^ that the colony was established 
after the suppression of the insurrection. This statement may 
be reconciled with that of Dion Cassius by supposing that the 
founding of the colony was interrupted by the revolt, and com- 
pleted after its suppression. Hadrian was a great builder and 
restorer of cities : he had seen the ruins of Jerusalem, and 
the restoration of the old capital of the Jews to its former 
magnificence may well have appealed to his imagination. 
Possibly, too, he may have considered the foundation of a 
colony in a strong position in Judaea a wise precaution in view 
of the state of Jewish feeling,^ which must have been well known 
to him. It would seem, then, that the revolt was due to a 
combination of circumstances— the annual irritation produced 
by the collection of the temple tax, the edict forbidding circum- 
cision, and the decision ^ to rebuild Jerusalem as a heathen city, 
with its principal temple on the spot once hallowed by the 
Temple of Jehovah. 

The insurgent Jews, animated by the belief that the Messiah 
had appeared in the person of Bar Koziba,^ at first carried 
everything before them. Jerusalem was taken,'' and 50 fortified 
places and 955 open towns and villages appear to have fallen 

* Appendix IV., 8, i. 

^ The growth of the civil population at Jerusalem may have been so great 
as to hare become dangerous. 

^ Probably in a.d. 130, when Hadrian visited Syria (Appendix IV., 9). 
Renan gives A.s. 122 as the date of the visit. 

* The destruction of the Temple, and consequent cessation of the 
sacrifices, gave fresh strength to the Messianic hope of the Jews, whose 
aspirations, partly political, were of sufficient importance to attract the 
notice of the emperors. According to Hegesippus (Appendix IV., 8, v.), 
Vespasian, Pomitian and Trajan attempted to extirpate the royal race 
by hunting down and executing all Jews of the House of David. It is 
not proved that Bar Koziba proclaimed himself the Messiah, but Babbi 
Akiba said of him, '* This is the King Messiah," and the people certainly 
believed him to be so when they anointed and crowned him king at Bether. 
All the Jews in Palestine, and probably all the Samaritans (Jewish 
Encyclopaedia, Art. " Bar Eokba ''), joined him ; the Christians held aloof. 

^ This is evident from the recapture of the city and from the coins, 
though Jewish writers are silent. 


into their hands.^ Coins were struck,^ and an attempt was made 
to rebuild the Temple.^ Little is known of the incidents con- 
nected with the progress of the war. Jewish tradition relates 
that the Eomans fought 52 battles, not always with success."* 
The capture of Jerusalem by the Jews, and its recapture by the 
Komans, although both seem certain, are nowhere described. 
Tineius Kufus,^ the governor, and Marcellus, the governor of 
Syria, who was sent to his assistance, were unable to quell the 
rising, and it was not until the arrival of Severus from Britain, 
in A.D. 135, that the war was brought to a close by the capture 
of Bether (Bittir), after it had lasted three and a half years. 
The date of the recapture^ of Jerusalem is uncertain, but the 
city would appear, from the coins, to have been in the hands of 
the Jews for more than a year. The termination of the war 

* Appendix TV., 4, iv. 

2 Madden (The Coins of the Jews, Lond., 1881, pp. 234-246), 
describes coins of Vespasian, Domitian, and Trajan, which are super- 
struck on the obyerse with the name Simon and some device such 
as a wreath, a cluster of grapes, a tetrastyle temple, or more probably the 
Stoa Basilica, &c., and on the reverse with the legend, the deliverance of 
Jerusalem. There are also coins of Vespasian and Trajan which are super- 
struck with the legend, second year of the deliverance of Israel. See also 
Caignart de Saulcj, Numismatique de la Terre Sainte. 

^ The attempt to rebuild the Temple may be inferred from Chrysostom, 
the Paschal Chronicle, G. Cedrenus, and Niceph. Callistus, cf. Jerome, 
Appendix IV., 11, iii. According to Jewish tradition, Hadrian granted the 
Jews permission to rebuild the Temple, but withdrew it, after work had 
been commenced, in consequence of the representations of tlie Samaritans. 

* The Roman armies certainly experienced disasters and mishaps, and 
one of these may have been the loss of Jerusalem. The Tenth Legion, or 
a part of it, which was at Jerusalem early in the third century, when Dion 
Cassius wrote, may have been temporarily withdrawn for service east of 
Jordan, in the lately -formed province of Arabia, and the weakened garrison 
rushed before there was time for the concentration of troops. 

' Called Tinnius Bufus by Syncellus ; T^nius Rufus (Chronicles), TimuB 
Eufus {in Dan. ix), and Titus Junius Rufus {in Zach. viii) by Jerome ; and 
Tumus Rufus and Tyrannus Rufus by the Rabbis (Appendix IV., 23). 

* The fact of the recapture of Jerusalem is stated by Appian and 
the Samaritan Book of Joshua. It may also be inferred from Eusebius 
(Appendix IV., 8), Chrysostom (Appendix IV., 14), Jerome (Appendix IV., 
11), the Paschal Chronicle (Appendix IV., 24), &c. 


left Palestine a desert, and Jerusalem a heap of niins.^ According 
to the Mishna, Jerusalem was levelled down with the plough 
but according to Maimonides and Jerome the plough was only 
passed over the site of the Temple.^ The prisoners were sold at 
the annual market by the Terebinth, near Hebron, and at the 
Gaza market, which was afterwards called " Hadrian's Mart," or 
were shipped to Egypt for sale.^ A heavy poll tax was imposed 
upon all Jews, and the laws against them were stringently 

The position of the Church at Jerusalem, and the attitude of 
the governors towards it and towards the Judaeo-Christians, are 
obscure. When the Church re-formed round Simeon it had lost 
its pre-eminence. Christianity had passed beyond Judaism and 
entered a wider field ; but those Christians who had carried with 
them to Pella an unabated reverence for the Law, appear to 
have returned unchanged. Titus, at the time of the siege, seems 
to have regarded the Christians as a Jewish sect,* and at first 
the governors, probably, saw little difference and made little 
distinction between the Judaeo-Christian and the outcast Jew 
Simeon and the Bishops who succeeded him were of the circum- 

Justin Martjr (Appendix IV., 7) ; cf. Jerome (Appendix IV., 11, iv). 
The end is said to have been presaged by the fall of Solomon's monument 
and other omens (Appendix IV., 4). 

' Taanith iy, 6 ; cf, Maimonides (Appendix IV., 23), and Jerome 
(Appendix IV., 11, iii). If the plough had been passed oyer Jerusalem, 
Hadrian could not hare rebuilfc the city. The tradition may refer either 
to the ceremony of initiation when a new city was founded (see Schiirer, 
History of the Jewish People^ p. 308), or to the exauguration of the site of 
the Temple, as an intimation to the Jews that no emperor would eyer 
permit their place of worship to be rebuilt. In the latter case it is difficult 
to explain the attempt of Julian to rebuild the Temple ; and the temple of 
Jupiter erected by Hadrian, though within the precincts or peribolos wall 
of the Temple, could not hare stood on the exact spot occupied by the 
sacred building. 

3 Jerome (Appendix IV., 11, iy) ; Paschal Chronicle (Appendix IV., 24), 
* Titus, in a council held during the siege of Jerusalem, is said to have 
expressed the view that the Temple ought to be destroyed, in order that the 
religions of the Jews and the Christians might be extirpated, for though 
opposed to each other, they had the same origin (Appendix IV., 12), (see 
Bamsay, Church in the Soman JEmpirCy p. 254). 


cision,^ and it was only gradually that all attempt to conform 
to the Mosaic Law was abandoned. The alienation from Judaism 
became complete when Bar Koziba was openly received as the 
Messiah. The Christians, who were eagerly expecting the second 
coming of Christ, could not listen to the claims of another 
(earthly) Messiah, and could take no part in a movement of 
which the Messianic character was so pronounced. They were 
consequently persecuted with peculiar violence by the insurgent 
Jews.2 During the period A.D. 73-135 there appears to have 
been no formal law forbidding Christianity, and no express edict 
ordering its suppression. Christianity was, however, a reliffio 
illkita, and those who avowed themselves Christians were 
" treated like brigands caught in the act." ^ Under Domitian, 
the Christians at Jerusalem, especially those who had been cir- 
cumcised, were no doubt harassed and persecuted;* but they 
afterwards derived benefit from the milder policy of Nerva and 
Trajan, and their attitude towards the insurgent Jews must have 
produced a favourable impression upon the local governors and 
relaxed their severity. The only event that need be noticed is 
the martyrdom of Simeon, who was put to death because, as a 
relation of Christ, he was regarded as a descendant of David 
and one of the royal race.^ 

It would appear from the above that nothing occurred prior 
to the rebellion that would render the transmission of a tradition, 
brought back from Pella, impossible ; and it cannot be supposed 
that every Christian, whether of Jewish or Gentile descent, who 

' There seems no reason to doubt the succession of JudsBO-Ghristian 
bishops as given by Eusebius on the authority **of writings" (Appendix 
IV., 8, ii). 

2 Appendix IV., 7, 11, 17. Basnage (Histaire des Juifs, li, p. 361) 
considers that the heathen suffered as well as the Christians. In the Jewith 
Encyclopaedia, Art. *' Bar Kokba," it is maintained that the Christians were 
not compulsorily circumcised, and that they were not tortured. 

^ Bamsay, Church in the Roman Empire, p. 209 Jf*. 

^ The tax was coUectecf from all uncircumcised Jews, and Millman lias 
well suggested {History of Christianittf, ii, ch. 4) that the Christians suffered 
more than the unbelicTers from the measures taken to collect the temple 
tax (see p. 56). 

* Appendix IV., 8, viii. 


knew the positions of Golgotha and the Tomb, perished during 
the revolt. Nor is it probable that any existing tradition was 
broken by the action of Hadrian.' It may be true, as suggested 
by Williams,^ that the Emperor regarded the Jerusalem Church 
as an offshoot of the Synagogue, and that its members shared 
the lot of the Jews. But it ia equally true that the Gentile 
Christians were not banished from ^lia, for it had long been 
known that they were not a Jewish sect. 

Hadrian, on the suppression of the rebellion, was able to 
carry out his project of rebuilding Jerusalem ; and in A.D. 136, 
the year in which he celebrated his vicennaUa,* the new city 
was dedicated to Jupiter Capitolinus, and made a Roman colony 
under the title ColotUa /Elia Capilolina.* The size of the city is 

Fiff. 3. — Coma ot U.iDBUN, Fodndbb of thb Colont. 

unknown, but it was probably surrounded by a wall* which 
excluded the southern portion of the western spur, and included 
the traditional sites of Golgotha and the Tomb. Hadrian 
adorned the new colony with magnificent buildings, for which 
much of the material was obtained from the ruins of the Temple, 
palaces, Sec." 

' XJoger {Die Banlea CtmttaiUin'a, pp. 30, 21), assuming that there was 
a tradition with regard to tbe poiition of thilgotlu in tho time of Hsdriaa, 
considen that it maj almost be regarded a» certain that somo of the 
inhabitants remained who knew where Chriat waa crucified and buried. 

* The Eolg City, i, p. 215. 

' The twentieth, jear of his reign. On these festivals, which previously 
had only been celebrated by Auguitus and Trajan, it was ouslomarj to 
build or dedicate nen cities, or to re-name old onea. 

* .Xlia, from ^lius Uadrianus, and Capitolino, in honour of the god to 
whom the city wag dedicated. 

' For the citj and its wall, see Chap. XI. 
' Appendix IT., 8, liii. 


On the site once occupied by the Temple of Jehovah the 
Emperor erected a temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, which appears, 
from Imperial coins struck at Jerusalem, to have been similar 
in plan and arrangement to the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus 
at Eome, as restored by Domitian (see note on Coins, p. 70). 
There were three cellce^ and of these the central one was occupied 
by a statue of Jupiter, who was regarded as the guardian 
deity of the city. In the cellce to the right and left were 
statues of Juno and Minerva; and there were also, in the 
temple precincts, statues of the founder of the city.^ Amongst 
other buildings attributed to Hadrian are the two Demosia, the 
theatre, the Trikameron, the Tetranymphon, the Dodekapylon, 
formerly called Anabathmoi (the "steps*'), and the Kodra.^ 
On the gate which led to Bethlehem was sculptured a boar, 
the fifth in rank of the dgna militaria of the Eoman army, and 
probably connected with the Tenth Legion, which had long been ' 
quartered in the adjoining camp.^ 

The constitution of ^lia was that of a Eoman colony ; and 
the city was divided into seven quarters, each having its head- 
man. Jews were excluded by stringent laws. They were 
forbidden to enter under pain of death. Guards were stationed 
to prevent their entrance, and they were not allowed even to 
gaze upon the city from a distant height."* Pagans and Christians 

' * Appendix IV., 4. The Bordeaux Pilgrim mentions two statues of 
Hadrian ; Jerome, in Is., ii, 9, a statue of Jupiter and one of Hadrian ; and 
in Matt, xxiy, 15, an equestrian statue of the Emperor (Appendix IV., 1 1, ix). 
Possibly there was a statue in the temple, and an equestrian statue in the 
precincts. An inscription in the south wall of the Har&m esh-Sherif 
probably belonged to a statue of Antoninus Pius in the temple precincts. 

2 Appendix IV., 24. 

^ Bliss and Dickie found a tile with the stamp of the Tenth Legion, and 
a boar {Excavations at Jerusalem, PI. xxvii). See Clermont-Ganneau {Trois 
Inscriptions de la X'***' Legion Fretensis; Horus et St. Georges ; £tudes 
(T Archeologie Orientate, i, 90, for the boar of the Tenth Legion. 

* Appendix IV., 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 17. The prohibition, which probably 
applied to circumcised Christians as well as to Jews, was still in force early 
in the fourth century. It does not appear to have been relaxed until the 
reign of Constantine (Bordeaux Pilgrims). Eusebius in his *' Theophania ** 
describes the people of Jerusalem as being not Jews but ** foreigners and 
descendants of another race " (Appendix IV., 8, xiy). 


alone were allowed to reside in the city, and the magnificence 
of the colony was of an essentially pagan character. The chief 
religions worship was that of Jupiter Capitolinus. But Bacchus, 
Serapis, Venus, or Astarte, the Dioscuri, and the local Tyche, or 
city goddess, are represented on the coins ' of the city, and a 


temple may have been dedicated to one or more of these deities 
by Hadrian or some later emperor. On the ground now occupied 
by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre stood one such temple, 
with regard to which there appear to have been two distinct 
traditions — one Greek, the other Latin. The first is that 
unknown persons erected a temple of Aphrodite above the 
Tomb of Christy the second that Hadrian set up (whether in 
a temple or not is not directly stated) a statue of Venus on 
the spot where Christ suffered, and a statue of Jupiter above 
the Tomb. 

The Greek tradition is in general agreement with the state- 
ment of EusebiuH (a,d, 260-339) — the only writer on the subject 
who could have seen the Temple before it was demolished to 
make room for Conatantine's churches. In his Life of Constantino * 
Eusebius says that certain ungodly and impious persons 
covered up the Tomb and built, on a paved floor above it, " a 
gloomy shrine " to Aphrodite, thinking that they would thereby 
conceal the truth. Sozomen {a,d. 375-450) states^ that the 
Tomb and Golgotha were covered up by pagans who had formerly 
persecuted the Church, and that the whole place was enclosed by 

* Appendix 

* Appendix 

la range from A..D. 136 to the reigo of Talerian, ^d. 260. 


a wall and paved. The pagans erected a '* temple " to Aphrodite, 
and set up " a little image," so that those who went to worship 
Christ would appear to bow the knee to Aphrodite. Socrates 
(a.d. 379) relates^ that those who hated Christianity covered 
the tomb with earth, on which they built a temple of Aphrodite 
with her image. In the later tradition of Alexander Monachus,- 
who wrote in the sixth century, the holy places were covered 
up by the Jews, and the temple and statute of Aphrodite were 
the work of idolaters of later date. 

The Latin tradition rests upon the authority of writers who, 
although some of them may have conversed with old men 
who had seen the temple when young, had no personal know- 
ledge of the " holy places " before their isolation from the 
surrounding rock by Constantine's architect. So far, then, as 
they contradict Eusebius, they cannot be given the preference. 
Rufinus (a.d. 345-410), who does not mention a temple, says ^ 
that an image of Venus had been set up by the ancient perse- 
cutors on the spot where Christ had hung upon the Cross, so that 
if any Christian came to worship Christ, he might appear to be 
worshipping Venus. Jerome (a.d. 346-420) writes,* drca 395, that 
from the time of Hadrian to the reign of Constantino there 
stood a statue of Jupiter in the place of the Resurrection, 
and one of Venus, in marble, on the rock of the Cross, which 
was worshipped by the people. " The instigators of the perse- 
cution thought that they would take away our faith in the 
Resurrection and the Cross if they defiled the holy places with 
idols." Paulinus of Nola (a.d. 353-431), writing to Severus, 
says ^ that Hadrian, " imagining that he could kill the Christian 
faith by defacing the place, consecrated an image of Jupiter on 
the site of the Passion." Sulpicius Severus (a.d. 363-420) 
states ^ that images of demons were set up both " in the temple 
and in the place where the Lord suffered." Ambrose (a.d. 
340-397) says,^ in a doubtful passage, that Christ suffered in 

* Appendix V., 3, i. * Appendix V., 13, i. 

2 Appendix V., 5. ' Appendix V., 14, i. 

3 Appendix V., 12. * Appendix IV., 12, ii. 

' Appendix V., 10, 


the Venerarium (».6., the place where the statue of Venus was 
set up). 

The conflicting statements of the Greek and Latin writers 
may, perhaps, be reconciled by supposing that during the early 
part of Constantine's reign the traditional sites of Golgotha and 
the Tomb were covered and hidden from view by an artificial 
platform, upon which, immediately above the Tomb, stood a 
temple of Venus (Aphrodite) ^ containing statues of that goddess 
and of Jupiter (Zeus). That in the latter part of the reign, 
Ck)nstantine's architect, who cut away the rock to obtain a level 
platform for the churches, left the two " holy places " standing 
up from the floor as separate masses of limestone. And that 
in after years, when the size and internal arrangement of the 
temple had been forgotten, this isolation gave rise to the theory 
that each holy place had been intentionally defiled by the erection 
upon it of an image of a heathen deity.^ It may, perhaps, be 
inferred, from the discrepancy between Jerome and Paulinus 
with regard to the statue on the rock of the Cross, that there 
was no very definite tradition when they wrote. 

The statements respecting the origin of the temple cannot be 
reconciled. The expressions " gloomy shrine " ^ and " impious 
persons," used by Eusebius, conveyed the impression that he is 
describing a small temple, and not a building erected by Imperial 
command. When Eusebius wrote no one would have ventured 
to call one of the emperors an impious person. On the other 
hand, the statement that the material for the substructures was 
obtained from some place outside the city (t^tvOev), and that the 
shrine stood on a paved platform, does not support the view that 

^ I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the Greek and Latin writers 
with regard to the deitj. In a Roman colony a temple of Venus would be 
more natural than one dedicated to Astarte, and Eusebius would probably 
have mentioned the Syrian goddess if the building had been erected in her 
honour. The coins bearing a supposed representation of a temple of Astarte 
are no proof that that particular temple stood above the Tomb. 

^ The original form of the ground, and the distance apart of Golgotha 
and the Tomb, seem to exclude the theory that they were included in one 
temple, and that each had its special statue in that temple. 

^ OKirios fjLvx^s ; Socrates and Sozomen use the usual word yaos. 



the building was insignificant. Hadrian, whose name is men- 
tioned in connection with the "holy places" by no Greek 
writer, is first introduced by Jerome and Paulinus, who wrote 
sixty to seventy years after the temple had been demolished. 
There is no proof that he built the temple of Venus ; that he 
erected any temple at a place known in his time as Golgotha ; 
or that he intended to build one above the tomb of Christ. 
It is very unlikely that Hadrian, who had confirmed and ex- 
tended Trajan's policy of leniency towards the Christians, and 
who must have known how they had been persecuted by the 
Jews for not taking part in the revolt, would have intentionally 
insulted them by building a temple above the Tomb, or by 
setting up statues above the Tomb and on the site of the 
Passion. On the other hand, it would be not altogether unlike 
the ironical spirit of the Emperor to extend contemptuous 
toleration to those he considered wretched fanatics, and at the 
same time to cover up their holy places as a sort of sarcastic 
jest.^ It must also be remembered that Hadrian zealously 
patronised the Graeco-Eoman religious rites ; and that, in erect- 
ing temples in the Oriental provinces of the empire, his purpose 
was that they should act as constant reminders of the cult of 
Borne, and of the connexion between the provinces and the 
metropolis. The Emperor built the great temple of Venus 
at the capital, and temples of Venus at other places; 
and it is not unreasonable to suppose that he built one at 
Jerusalem in addition to the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus 
(see p. 62). The discovery of a fragment of an inscription in 
two lines, in the Eussian property at the East end of the 
present Church of the Holy Sepulchre, perhaps lends some 
support to this view (see Fig. 5). 

The inscription has been attributed to Hadrian, and may 
have been connected with the temple. If he did build a 

^ Dr. Sanday writes (Sacred Sites of the Gospels, p. 74) : — "It does 
not follow that there was any intentional profanation of a site known to be 
held sacred. If the building of the pagan temple dates, as it probably does, 
from the reign of Hadrian, Boman animosity was then directed not against 
the Christians but against the Jews." 


temple of Yenus, the probability is that the selection of the 
Tomb as its site was not intentional. The theory that 
because a temple of Jupiter was built on the site of the 
Temple of the Jews, the site covered by the temple of Venus 
must have been a spot which the Christiana held to he sacred, is 

"Eia. G. — InscBiFTioH iohhd at Eibt Bitd of Cbdbcb 
OF Holt SiPCLcmB. 

All authorities concur in the opinion that the defilement of 
the " holy places " was intentional ; and admitting, for the 
sake of argument, that the positions of Golgotha and the Tomb 
were known ^ to Christians, Jews, and Pagans, it is quite con- 
ceivable that an attempt was made to cover them up and defile 
them during some period of persecution. If this was the case, 
the defilement was probably a spontaneous act on the part of 
the local authorities, and not due to an Imperial rescript. A 
possible explanation is that some of the squatters who occupied 
t&e region of the bazars after the capture of the city by Titus 
(see p. 53), erected a small shrine dedicated to Astarte above 
the Sepulchre, which was recognized afterwards as the Tomb 
of Christ, and that Hadrian replaced the shrine by a temple 
dedicated to Venus. 

of this question, see Chap. VIII. 


Little is known of the history of -^lia^ during the 
period A.D. 136-326. With the foundation of the new city the 
Jerusalem Church lost its distinctive Judseo-Christian character. 

The rebellion of the false Messiah had broken the close 
relations that existed between the Church and the Synagogue, 
and, on the termination of the war, political necessity dictated 
the election of a Gentile bishop. Under Marcus and his Gentile 
successors, the Church fell more and more under the influence 
of Greek thought and sentiment. The breach with Judaism 
soon became complete, and the Church eventually branded as 
heretics those Judseo-Christians, such as the Nazarenes or 
Ebionites, who held to the law and rejected Paul as an 
exponent of Christianity. So great was the revulsion in feeling, 
that the place upon which the Temple of Jehovah had stood 
was, in course of time, regarded as accursed and profane. 

The Christians no doubt suffered during the several persecu- 
tions, but they do not appear to have been specially molested. 
The long tenure of the Jerusalem bishopric bjr Narcissus (a.d. 
190-213?); the foundation by his successor, Alexander (a.d. 
213-251), of a library which was extant in the time of Eusebius ; ^ 
the collection of books and manuscripts formed by Origen at 
Csesarea (a.d. 231-253) ; and the pilgrimage of a lady mentioned 
by Cyprian,^ indicate that, in Judaea, and in -^lia, the Church 
grew and prospered in spite of persecution. Nothing occurred 
that would have led Christians who knew the positions of 
Golgotha and the Tomb to forget them. 

In Jewish tradition, however, there may have been a breaks 
Except, possibly, during the later years of the reign of Septimius 
Severus (a.d. 193-211), the order forbidding Jews to approach 

^ The name ^lia so completely supplanted Jerusalem, that a G-oremor 
of Palestine, in the reign of Diocletian, is said to have asked what city the 
latter was (Eusebius, The Martyrs of Falestine, xi). Eusebius in his History 
calls the city JSlia, and in his Life of Constantine Jerusalem. For some 
years after Constantine*s reign the two names were used together. 

*^ RUtoria Ecclesiastical vi, 20. (Migne, Patrologia Grasca, xx, col. 
672.) Alexander was bishop coadjutor until the death of Narcissus. 

^ Spistola, 75. (Migne, Fatrologia Latina, iii, col. 1,164.) 


the city was strictly enforced, and there was no relaxation until 
the reign of C!onstantine. During the long period of 190 years 
the Jews may well have forgotten the exact positions of places 
that were of no special interest to them, although, possibly, a 
general idea of the direction in which they lay may have 

The brief epitome of the history of Jerusalem which has 
been given above strongly suggests the conclusion that if 
Golgotha and the Tomb were regarded by the early Christians 
as "holy places," or as of any special importance, the Church 
would have experienced no difficulty in preserving a knowledge 
of their positions until they were officially recovered by order of 
Constantine.^ Whether the attitude of the early Christians 
towards those places was such as to encourage the belief that the 
knowledge was preserved, is another question. It is also apparent 
that, until the foundation of ^lia in A.D. 136, nothing occurred 
to break the continuity of any Jewish tradition connected with 


The bronze cbins of -^lia supply certain information which 
demands a short notice. The long series commences with Hadrian, 
and ends with Valerian (a.d. 136-260), and some of the most interesting 
types are reproduced here. 

1. (Fig. 3, p. 61).— A coin of Hadrian. Rev. COL. AEL. KAPIT, 
and in the exergue COND. A colonist driving two oxen to the right, 
behind them a standard fixed in the ground.^ " This coin represents 
the foundation of the colony — a colonist drawing the furrow to mark 
the limits of the future enclosure," ^ and not, as some writers have sup- 
posed, the exauguration of the Temple and its precincts by passing 
a plough over the ruins. The same type is found in a coin of Marcus 

* There was no ** yawning breach in the history of the Christian Church 
of Jerusalem between its first founding and the time of Constantine.'' The 
two breaks were Pella and the outbreak in Hadrian's reign. (Sandaj, Sacred 
Sites of the Gospels^ p. 75.) 

^ Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 249, No. 1. 
' Beinach, Jewish Coins, p. 60. 

* Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 257, No. 2. 


2. (PI. VI, No. 1). — A coin of Hadrian. Rev, COL. AEL., and in 
the exergue CAP. Jupiter seated in a distyle temple, and on either 
side of him a standing figure holding a spear.^ " This coin represents 
the three divinities — Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, who were worshipped 
in the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus at Eome and -^lia." ^ A coin of 
the same type was struck in the reign of Diadumenian (a.d. 217-218).^ 
The type may be compared with the medals and coins representing 
the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus at Kome. The temple rebuilt by 
Vespasian appears, from a bronze medal of that Emperor (PI. VII, 
No. 5), to have been hexastyle, with three cellae, in which were figures 
of Minerva, Jupiter seated on his throne, and Juno. But, after its 
destruction by fire in the reign of Titus, it seems to have been rebuilt 
and completed by Domitian as a tetrastyle temple, with three ceUae * 
(PI. VII, Fig. 6). Legend, CAPIT., and in the exergue, EESTIT. The 
temple erected by Hadrian at ^lia was possibly built on the same 
plan as that at Eome. 

3. (PI. VI, No. 3).— A coin of Hadrian. Rev, COND., and in the 
exergue, CO. AE. CAP. A crowned figure standing in a hexastyle 
temple, holding a head in the right hand and a sceptre in the left. 
The right foot resting upon a rock, or block of stone.* The figure has 
been identified, erroneously, with Astarte by De Saulcy and others ; 
but it represents, apparently, the city Tyche holding the bust or head 
of the reigning Emperor, and resting on a sceptre. The rock has, 
perhaps, reference to the site of the city. The legend COND. shows 
that the coin must have been struck soon after No. 1. 

4. (PI. VI, No. 4). — A coin of Antoninus Pius. Rev..^ the city 
Tyche ; same type as No. 3, but standing in a tetrastyle temple. In 
the exergue C. A. C. ® Coins of similar type were struck during the 
reigns of M. Aurelius and Verus, Pescennius Niger, Septimus Severus, 
Diadumenian, and Elagabalus.^ 

6. (Fig. 4, p. 63). — ^A coin of Antoninus Pius. Rev,, CO. AE. CAP. 
A turreted bust of the city.* 

6. (PI. VI, No. 6).— A coin of M. Aurelius and Verus. Rev, 
COL. CAP., and in the exergue AEL. Jupiter seated in a tetrastyle 

^ Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 250, No. 3. 

^ Beinach, Jewish Coins, p. 60. 

•^ Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 266, No. 1. 

^ For details, see Donaldson's Architectura Numisniatica, p. 6 ff . 

^ Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 249, No. 2. 

e Ihid., p. 255, No. 13. 

" Ihid., pp. 260, No. 4; 266, No. 2 j 269, No. 12. 

8 Ihid., p. 258, No. 5. 

« Ihid,, p. 259, No. 3. 

No. 5. — CorN OP M. AtTRBUlTH t,VD Vbihtb, 

X.i. 1.— Coin of Fispt Bivoft. 
^" ?.— Coi.v i.v wiiKit Tax wab r 
-Cots OF Secok!) Bevoi.t. 

No. 4.— Coin of Second Revolt, 
No. 5. — Medal op Vespasiab. 
lid. C— Coin of Domitiik. 


7. (PL VI, No. 2).— Al coin of Diadumenian. Rev, COL. CAP. 
GOMM., and in the exergue P.F. The city Tyche crowned and 
standing in a tetrastyle temple, holding the head of the Emperor, 
and resting upon a sceptre, the right foot resting upon a rock or a 
helmet^ On either side, in the spaces of the columns, a " Victory " 
standing on a globe. There is a coin of Elagabalus of similar type.' 

Amongst other types are — ^the bust of Serapis, which appears on 
the coins of ten emperors ; Bacchus ; the Dioscuri ; the head of the sun 
radiate ; the Koman eagle on a standard ; the eagle on a thunderbolt ; 
the city Tyche seated, holding a patera and comucopiae ; the wolf 
suckling Romulus and Remus. None of these, however, throw any 
light upon the temples or cults of the city. 

Coins represented on Plate VII. 

No. 1. Small bronze coin of first revolt (a.d. 66-70). 06., Cheruth 
Zumy "deliverance of Zion," round a vine leaf. Rev,^ Shetuuh Shetaim^ 
•* year two," round a two-handed vase.* 

No. 2. Coin (denarius) in which the two drachmae tax was paid. 
m., Titus laureated; T. CAES. IMP. VESP. PON. TR. POT. Rev., in 
the centre a palm tree, to the right a seated captive — Judaea, to the 
left Titus standing in military dress, holding spear and parazonium, 
and'placing left foot on helmet^ 

No. 3. Shekel, or debased Attic tetradrachm, of second revolt (a.d. 
182-135). 06., conventional representation of a tetrastyle temple, or, 
moare probably of the west end of the southern portico, Stoa BoMica, 
of the temple; above the portico a star. Rev., "The freedom of 
Jerusalem,'' the ethrog, citron, and lulah, bundle of twigs.' 

No. 4. Coin of second revolt struck on a Roman coin. 06., Simon, 
within a wreath, on the dm are traces of TIAN (Domitian) AVG. 
£Up^ "The freedom of Jerusalem,'* round a three-stringed lyre.® 

No. 5. Bronze medal of Vespasian with representation of the temple 
oC'jQpiter Capitolinus at Rome, as restored by that Emperor. 

No. 6. Cistophorus of Asia Minor, of Domitian, representing the 
teniple of Jupiter Capitolinus, as restored by the same Emperor. 
flIlpDed CAPIT, and in the exergue RESTIT. 


^ Madden, The Coins of the Jews, p. 266, No. 2. 
« md,, p. 268, No. 8. 4 J5irf., p. 219, No. 1. 

* Ibid., p. 206, No. 11. ° Ibid., p. 239, No. 18. 

6 Ibid., p. 236, No. 8. 



The Attitude of the Early Christians towards 

Golgotha and the Tomb. 

The discussion of this point is beset with difficulties. There is 
not in the works of any writer prior to the age of Constantine, so 
far as I am aware, the faintest shadow of a hint that the early 
Christians held the places of the Crucifixion and Burial in any 
special honour, that they offered prayers to God at them, or that 
they even knew where they were situated. This silence, which 
has opened a wide field for speculation, is suggestive, but not 
conclusive. At one extreme is the view of Chateaubriand,^ that 
the Holy Sepulchre was honoured, under the name Martyrion, 
from the very birth of Christianity as a witness or testimony of 
the Resurrection ; and, at the other, the opinion of those who 
believe that to the early Christians the risen Lord was every- 
thing and the Tomb nothing. Between the two extremes lies 
the suggestion ^ that, although there was no special cult of the 
Holy Sepulchre in the first centuries of Christianity, it may well 
have happened that the small Christian community of Jerusalem, 
which was at enmity with and hated by the whole world, 
preserved the memory of places round which all their hopes of 
the fulfilment of prophecy were gathered. In which direction 
does probability lie? The first Christians were Jews, and this 
question must be considered from the Judseo-Christian rather 
than from the Hellenic or Latin point of view. 

Little is known of the rites and customs of the Jews con- 
nected with the burial of the dead ; but it is at least certain that 

^ ItinSraire de FarU ot Jerusalem, " Introduction." 

^ Unger, Die Bttuten Constantin'a des Grossen am heiligen Grabe zu 
Jerusalem, pp. 20, 21. See also Guthe, ''Grab, das heilige/' in Hanck's 
RealencyklopsBdie : — Even if the first Christians, as spiritual followers of 
Christ, attached no importance to the scene of the Resurrection, it would have 
been contrary to human nature and custom to have forgotten it. 


every Jew attached great importance to burial in the family 
tomb ; ^ and this suggests the belief that the disciples and friends 
of Jesus did not intend the sepulchre of Joseph to be His 
permanent resting-place. The body was placed in it^ because 
they were pressed for time — the Sabbath was nigh, and the 
tomb was close at hand. According to John (xix, 39, 40) the 
body, when taken down from the Cross, was bound "in linen 
elothes with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury " ; 
^nd the preparation for burial, though hurried, was apparently 
complete.^ Matthew, Mark, and Luke state that the body was 
wrapped by Joseph in a linen sheet, but mention no spices. All 
four Evangelists describe the visit of the women to the Sepulchre 
on the first Sunday morning : Mark says that " when the Sabbath 
was past " the women " bought spices that they might come and 
anoint him"; Luke states that, after the entombment, they 
■" returned and prepared spices and ointments," and that on the 
first day " they came unto the tomb, bringing the spices which 
they had prepared." Matthew and John do not allude to the 
spices.* The body was apparently laid on the rock-hewn bench 
which surrounded the ante-chamber ; » it was certainly not placed 
in a loculus. 

^ There was a common belief that if a Jew wished to be reunited with 
his family in Sheol, he must be buried in the family sepulchre. Even the 
'bones of an executed criminal were removed from the common tomb to the 
family vault wlien the decomposition of the body was complete. 

^ Possibly Joseph, in begging the body from Pilate and placing it in his 
•own grave, intended to save it from the indignity of burial in the common 
tomb, and to mark his profound feeling of respect for Jesus (cf, G-en. 
xxiii, 6 ; 2 Ch. xxiv, 16). 

^ For what is known of Jewish burial customs, and their application to 
-the question of Christ's burial, see articles by Bender in Jewish Quan^terly 
Review, vols. 6 and 7; articles on Anointment, Burial, Tombs, Dead, 
Mourning Customs, &c., in Smith's Dictionary of the Bibles Hastings' 
DieHonary of the Bible ; Encyclopaedia Biblica ; Jewish Encyclopaedia ; and 
Bevue Biblique, 1902, pp. 567, 668. 

'* Matt, xxvii, 59 ; xxviii, 1 ; Mark xv, 46 ; xvi, 1 ; Luke xxiii, 53 ; xxiv, 1 ; 
John xix, 39, 40 ; xx, 1. 

^ Such ante-chambers are common in the rock-hewn tombs of Palestine, 
«nd according to Cyril (Appendix Y., 16, iii) the traditional Holy Sepulchre 
had one, which was cut away when the church was built. 


The usual explanations of the visit of the women are, that 
they intended to complete the burial by anointing the body and 
clothing it in the usual grave-clothes, or that they simply desired 
to spread spices over the body to counteract the effect of decom- 
position before the body was placed in a loculus. The anoint- 
ment of a lacerated body which had lain in the tomb thirty-six 
hours — a period sufficient for incipient decomposition (cf. John 
xi, 39), is most unlikely, and is opposed to the little that is 
known of Jewish sentiment and custom. The other explanation 
is less open to objection ; but it seems at least as probable that 
the motive of the women was the preparation of the body for 
removal on a bier (<to/909, Luke vii, 14) to a family tomb, either 
at Bethany, Bethlehem, or on the slopes of the Mount of Olives. 

The first Christians "had all things in common," and "as 
many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and 
brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at 
the Apostles' feet." ^ Joseph of Arimathea was a secret disciple 
of Christ,^ and, according to tradition, he was one of those who 
went out as a missionary to the Gentiles. There is no reason to 
suppose that he acted differently to other Christians, and it is 
probable, if not certain, that, like Joseph, surnamed Barnabas,^ 
he sold his property, including the garden and tomb, for the 
benefit of the common purse. 

Visits to family tombs were not uncommon amongst the 
Jews. They were a tribute to the memory of those members 
of the family buried in the sepulchre, and were not unconnected 
with current beliefs respecting the dead. But a visit by a Jew, 
or by a Judseo-Christian, to an empty tomb for the purpose of 
prayer, is almost inconceivable in the early days of Christianity. 
Apart from this, it was the general belief amongst the first 

1 Acts ii, 44, 45 ; iv, 34, 35 ; cf. v, 1-11. 

2 John xix, 38. 

^ The special mention of Barnabas is, perhaps, due to the fact that he 
was afterwards a companion of Paul. Flessing {Ueher Qolgotha und Chritti 
Cff'cibf pp. 45-46) discusses at length the action of Joseph with regard to the 
Tomb. His conclusion is that if Joseph became a teacher, he must have sold 
his property, and with it the rock-hewn graye. 


Christians that Jesus was alive, that He had been raised by God, 
and had become a heavenly being ("He is risen," "He is ascended 
into heaven '') ; and many eagerly expected His immediate return 
to reign on earth, and so complete the death and resurrection. 
Peter, John, James, and Jude preach a risen Christ sitting at 
the right hand of God. How could they have been silent in 
their letters if they had believed the Tomb to be a powerful aid 
to holiness and a true religious life"? The early Christians 
needed no prayers at an empty tomb to remind them of their 
risen Lord, and it is not probable that they paid visits to places 
which, to those who had known Jesus in human form, must have 
been full of painful memories. 

Any cult of the Tomb during the early years of Christianity 
seems impossible,^ but a change may perhaps have occurred after 
the return from Pella. The Jewish believers at Jerusalem main- 
tained that a strict observance of the Mosaic law in its literal 
sense was essential to Christianity ; their chief place of worship 
was the Temple ; 2 and, in greater or less measure, they adhered 
to the national and political forms of Judaism. The lines of 
demarcation between Christian and Jew, and between Church 
and Synagogue, were but faintly marked. After the destruction 
of the Temple, the law and tradition became everything to the 
Jew. What was the effect of the national disaster upon the 
Jewish believers ? The cessation of the Temple services probably 
led to a development of meetings for prayer in private houses ^ 
and in the synagogues or churches. The Jerusalem Church 
gradually lost its supremacy, but its members continued to regard 
compliance with the ceremonial law as essential, and efforts to 
impose the yoke of the law upon Gentile Christians did not cease 
until the third century.^ No one can suppose that the rulers of 

^ Especially if, as has been suggested above, Joseph's tomb was never 
intended to be the permanent resting-place of Christ's Body, and had, 
shortly after the Ascension, passed into other (non-Christian) hands. 

2 Acts ii, 46 ; xxi, 20-26. 

2 Acts i, 14 ; xii, 12. 

* For the JudsBO-Christians and " Jewish Christianity," see Hamack, 
Higtory of Dogma^ Eng. ed., i, 289-301 j Ersch and G-ruber, Allgemeine 


the reconstructed church at Jerusalem sanctioned prayers at the 
Tomb, or anything in the form of a cult of " holy places." At 
that early period the spirituality of Christianity had not so 
<5ompletely expended its force as to render such an act probable 
or even possible.^ 

It cannot be denied, however, that the return from Pella was 
^n occasion which might reasonably give rise to visits to those 
places which were connected with the last days of Christ's life at 
Jerusalem. Such visits, due at first, perhaps, to curiosity, to a 
desire to see whether the operations of the great siege had altered 
the appearance of the localities, may in later years have been 
supplemented by prayers, and these simple acts may have 
^adually developed into a cult of Golgotha and the Tomb. 
There is, however, no evidence that any development, such as 
that suggested, took place ; and there is nothing in the scanty 
records of pilgrimages before the Council of Nicaea (a.d. 325) to 
•suggest its probability. 

A more reasonable supposition is that the Christians resorted 
to the Mount of Olives, where Christ taught his disciples, and 
whence He ascended into heaven ; and there are some grounds 
for believing that this was the case. Eusebius, in a passage of 
^eat interest,^ written before a.d. 325, says that people came 
from all parts of the earth to the Holy City, " to hear the story 
•of Jerusalem," and "to worship on the Mount of Olives, over 
Against Jerusalem, whither the glory of the Lord removed itself, 
leaving the earlier city." It is true that the historian describes 
what occurred in his own time; but worship on Olivet was 
evidently of earlier origin.^ Beside the way of the wilderness. 

Enctfklopaedie der WUsenschafteii und Kiinstey Art. " Juden.Christen '' ; 
WiUiams' Holy City, i, pp. 217-224. 

^ As those who had known Christ in human form died, and Uis divinity 
more and more filled the thoughts of men, a cult of the Tomb seems less and 
less possible. 

2 Appendix IV., 8, xii. 
According to Eusebius, " Q-od established it, in the place of the earthly 
Jerusalem and of the services which used to be held there, after the 
destruction of Jerusalem." Appendix IV., 8, xii. 


at the top of the ascent of the mount, there appears to have been 
a sanctuary, " where God was worshipped " ;^ probably the same 
spot to which Ezekiel saw the offended God of Israel remove 
from the Temple mount.^ The worship described by Eusebius, 
however, may have grown out of the visits which were almost 
certainly paid to the moimt by the Christians who returned from 
Pella. There is no feature near Jerusalem to which a resident 
would more naturally resort to note the changes that had taken 
place during his temporary absence, or to point out to a friend 
the site connected with the historic Jesus. The city, exposed to 
view in all its details, lies at the feet of the spectator. Is it not 
also a fair inference, from the absence of any allusion to the 
Tomb by Eusebius, that the place of Christ's burial was not 
known when he wrote, or, at any rate, that it was not a " holy 
place " 1 

It is most improbable that visits to, or any cult of, the Tomb 
originated with the early Gentile Christians. The whole spirit 
of Paul's teaching is opposed to the view that they attached any 
importance to material objects connected with the life of Christ, 
It is of the Eisen Lord that Paul speaks, rather than of the 
historic Jesus. The Christ of the Epistles is "not an earthly 
but a heavenly figure." To the early Christians it was not of 
pressing importance " to be acquainted with the life of Jesus on 
the earth " : their thoughts " were fixed on the heavenly Christ, 
in whose career the earthly appearance of Christ was a mere 
transitory, though an important, episode." ^ They believed that 
the End of the world, and the Kingdom of heaven, were at hand, 
and their minds were set " on things that are above, not on the 
things that are upon the earth." * Even the earthly Jerusalem 

^ 2 Sam. XV, 30, 32. 

2 Ezek. xi, 23 ; xliii, 1. Prof. Q-. Adam Smith in Expositor, 1905, p. 89, 

3 Menzies, The Earliest Gospel, pp. 6-9, where the attitude of the early 
Christians is well put. See also Harnack, History of Dogma, pp. 82-87. 

* Bovet takes a different view : — " It is true that such was the point of 
view of St. Paul, and doubtless of the other Apostles. But one would 
deceive oneself if one attributed the same spirituality to the masses which, 
from Pentecost onwards, composed the Christian Church. . . . One might 
with much more reason suppose that the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem 


had given place, in their imaginations, to that blissful kingdom 
of which it is written, " Jerusalem which is above is free, which 
is the mother of us all." 

No record of a pilgrimage to Jerusalem during the first three 
centuries by any Christian from the West has survived ; but 
according to Eusebius, Melito of Sardis(who died about a.d. 180) 
visited the East, and " reached the place where the Gospel was 
proclaimed and the Gospel history was acted out";^ and 
Alexander, a Cappadocian bishop, who succeeded Narcissus as 
Bishop of Jerusalem, visited the Holy City circa a.d. 212, "in 
consequence of a vow, and for the sake of information in regard 
to its places." ^ Origen went to Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, 
and Sidon (a.d. 226-253), partly, at least, to investigate the 
footsteps of Jesus and of his disciples and of the prophets.^ 
Firmilian, while on a visit to Palestine, visited Origen " for the 
purpose of the holy places";^ and in the time of Eusebius 
pilgrims visited Jerusalem to hear the story of the city, and to 
worship on the Mount of Olives (see p. 76). The Cave of the 
Nativity at Bethlehem is referred to by Origen,^ and Eusebius 
alludes^ to the cave on Olivet near which Christ taught his 
disciples. The site of the house at which the Apostles met after 
the Ascension appears also to have been known, and to have 
been occupied by a church which, according to a fourth-century 
tradition, existed in the reign of Hadrian.7 No other sacred 
localities are mentioned. The absence of any allusion to Golgotha 
or the Tomb, in passages such as the above, which might 
naturally be expected to contain some reference to them, is most 

already attached a particular interest, perhaps even an exaggerated 
importance, to the sacred places in their midst** (Voyage en Terre Sainte, 
3rd ed., pp. 198, 194). 

^ Historia JEcclesiastica^ iv, 26, § 14. 

2 Ibid., vi, 11, § 2. 

3 Origen, on John xi, 24; (Migne, Patrologia Orasca, xiv, col. 269). 
** Jerome, de Viris Illustribua, 64. 

* Contra Celsum, i, 61 ; Migne, Fatrologia Graeca, xi, col. 766. 
^ Appendix IV., 8, xii. 

' Appendix IV., 9, i. This may well have been the case if the house was 
on the western spur outside the limits of the Eoman Camp (see p. 145). 


marked, and suggests that their exact positions were unknown 
to the writers, or that they attached no importance to them.^ 

The attitude of Christians during the first three centuries to 
Golgotha and the Tomb is, in truth, a matter upon which no one 
can speak with any certainty. I can only express my personal 
belief that sacred localities, as we deem them, had little attraction 
to the early Christians ; that the Jerusalem Church attached no 
importance to them; that no steps were taken to preserve 
a knowledge of the position of those connected with the 
Crucifixion and Kesurrection ; that the Church would have 
discouraged anything in the nature of reverence to the Tomb ; 
and that, even amongst the less spiritual-minded members of the 
community, the survival of a tradition relating to Golgotha and 
the Tomb is improbable, although not, perhaps, impossible. 
The Christians of the first century, at least, could hardly fail to 
remember the great principle of their Master's teaching : " The 
hour Cometh, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, 

shall ye worship the Father God is a Spirit : and they 

that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth." 2 

^ Jerome, in an eloquent passage (Appendix V., 13, iii), refers to the 
number of bishops, martyrs, and men of ecclesiastical learning who had 
yisited Jerusalem every year since the Ascension ; but there is no eyidence 
of these numerous pilgrimages before the official recognition of Christianity 
by Constantino. 

2 John iv, 21-24. Even St. Jerome is fully in accord with the spirit of 
this text, for he writes : " St de Sierosolymis et de Britannia aequaliter 
patet calestis : * Regnum enim Dei intra vos est * '* (Appendix V., 18, i). 



The Identification of the Traditional Sites with 
Golgotha and the Tomb in the Reign of Con- 

The only contemporary account of the discovery of Golgotha and 
the Tomb, and of the erection of churches in their honour, is that 
given by Eusebius in his Life of Constantim.^ The " Life " has, 
somewhat unjustly, been called a travesty of history. Its 
literary style, so different from the simple prose of the Eccle- 
siastical History, its exaggerated praise of the Emperor, and its 
frequent 'attribution of Divine inspiration to his actions,^ create 
a not unnatural prejudice in the mind of the reader. But its 
author was no deliberate falsifier. His object seems to have 
been to write a panegyric rather than a sober history. After 
years of suffering he had seen his religion triumphant, and he 
wrote with poetic enthusiasm of the sovereign who had wrought 

^ Appendix V., 1. 

^ Commentators have attached undue importance to this attribution of 
DiTine inspiration. There was a widespread tendency amongst the early 
Christians, as there is in Palestine at the present day, to see in eveiything 
the hand of GK)d ; and the words of Eusebius would have been considered 
only natural at the time when they were written. Constantino laid the 
** everlasting foundations of Constantinople ** in " obedience to the commands 
of God" (Codex TheodosianuSy lib. xiii, tit. v, leg. 7). Bishop Alexander is 
said to have journeyed from Cappadociato Jerusalem "by Divine direction" 
(Eusebius, Historia Scclesiagtica^ vi, 11, § 2) ; it was by God's help that, 
according to Sozomen (Appendix V., 2), and Socrates (Appendix V., 3), 
Helena discovered the Tomb of Christ ; and when Justinian was building 
the Church of the Virgin at Jerusalem, " God pointed out in the nearest 
mountains a bed of stone " suitable for the quarrying of large columns that 
it was impossible to bring from a distance (Procopius, De ^defidis, v. 6; 
Palestine Pilgrim^ Texts, vol. ii). 


such a marvellous change. Can anyone regard his exuberant 
language as a crime ? Is he the only court prelate who has 
written fulsome praise of a monarch whose conduct was not 
above reproach ? Constantine was not a perfect Christian, but 
neither was he a Caligula, a Nero, or a Commodus, and he was 
infinitely superior to many of his successors who reigned 
centuries after Christianity had become the religion of the 

Eusebius, from his relations with the Imperial Court, and as 
Metropolitan of the Jerusalem See, was in a position to obtain 
accurate information, and, making allowance for his extravagant 
language, what he says with regard to the orders of the Emperor, 
and to the steps taken to carry them out, is deserving of the 
closest attention. His meaning is sometimes obscure, but his 
honesty and sincerity are apparent, whilst the general freedom 
of his writings from the fables and prodigies that disfigure later 
church histories are remarkable. The statements which he makes 
with regard to the " holy places," and to the churches erected in 
their honour, are not always clear, but some of the difiiculties 
disappear when it is remembered that the Life of Constantine was 
written after the Cross had been found,i and that the Emperor 
built two distinct churches — the Anastasis, and the Martyrion or 
Basilica of the Cross. There is no account of the finding of the 
Cross by an eye-witness,^ but its discovery when, or soon after, 
Golgotha and the Tomb were laid bare by excavation is attested 
by the letter of Cyril of Jerusalem, written in May, A.D. 351, to 
the Emperor Constantius,^ and by the allusions which Eusebius 

* The Theophania and The Praise of Canstantine^ were also written 
after the discovery. 

^ Eusebius avoids all direct reference to the Cross in such a marked 
manner, as to imply disapproval of the circumstances connected with its 
discovery. To him the Eesurrection was of infinitely greater importance 
than the instruments of the Passion. 

' " In the reign of your father Constantine, the beloved of Heaven, of 
happy memory, the salutary wood of the Cross was discovered at Jerusalem, 
the Divine One having permitted him, who duly sought after righteousness, 
to discover the Holy Places, which had heretofore been hidden away** 
{Ad Constant inunty in.; Migne, Patrologia Oraecay xxxiii, cols. 1,168, 1,169). 



apparently makes to the Cross.^ The two churches are referred 
to by Eusebius, and are distinctly mentioned by St. Silvia and 
others. 2 They stood not far from each other on a paved plat- 
form : one, the Anastasis, or Church of the Eesurrection, con- 
tained within its walls the reputed Tomb of Christ ; the other, 
the Martyrion, or Church of the Cross, stood above the spot 
where the crosses were found. In the open air, between the 
two churches, but a little to the south of their common axis, 
the rock upon which it was believed that the Cross had stood 
rose some fifteen feet above the level of the platform. 

It must also be remembered that the history of the "holy 
places," as told by Eusebius, although it is happily free from the 
fabulous legends which disfigured the accounts of later years, is 
incomplete. There is no indication of the motive, other than 
Divine inspiration, which led Constantine to institute a search 
for Golgotha and the Tomb ; the discovery of the Cross is not 
mentioned ; the letter of Constantine to Macarius is apparently a 
reply to a communication that has not been preserved ; and one 
expression in it, " the present wonder," seems to imply a previous 
"wonder," the nature of which is left to the imagination. 
Whether information on these points was given by Eusebius in 

' The expressions " the token of the most holy Passion," the " assurance 
of the Saviour's Passion " (Appendix V., 1, tI) ; the " trophy of the Sayiour's 
victory over death " (Appendix V., 1, ix, xx, xxi) ; and the " Church sacred 
to the salutary sign " are opposed to the view that the finding of the Gross 
is a " legend which grew up after the church was built " (Q-uthe, " Grab, 
das heilige," in Hauck's RealencyJclopssdie, See Appendix VI. 

2 Eusebius, Appendix V., 1, xx, xxi). In her '* Pilgrimage to the Holy 
Places" (Palestine Pilgrims' Texts ^ vol. i), St. Silvia calls the basilica "the 
great church built by Constantine which is in Golgotha behind the Cross," and 
"the holy church which is in Golgotha, which they call the Martyrium." 
(See also Eucherius, On the Holy Places; The Breviary of Jerusalem ; Theo- 
dosius. The Topography of the Holy Land; Antiochus Monachus, Appendix 
v., 6 ; and Theophanes, Appendix V., 8, ii.) St. Silvia also alludes to open- 
air services that were held before and behind the Cross which stood on 
the " rock of Golgotha " (see p. 13). The rock-hewn bases of the columns of 
the Anastasis, which were visible before the fire of 1808 (Mariti, Istoria 
dello stato presente del citta di Oerusalemme), indicate the extent to which 
the rock was cut away to obtain a level platform, isolate the tomb, and give 
prondnence to the rock of Golgotha. 


his " Oration on the Sepulchre of the Saviour," or in his treatise 
on " The Structure of the Church of our Saviour, and the Form 
of His Sacred Cave,"^ is unknown, for the two works are un- 
fortmiately lost. If it was given, he may have considered the 
repetition of the details unnecessary in his Life of Constantine. 
On the other hand, the omission of all reference to the discovery 
of the Cross may have been intentional.^ The author could 
make no adverse comments on an incident in which the Emperor 
and his mother were so deeply interested, and he may have 
decided to remain silent. Or he may have desired to say 
nothing that would divert attention from the fact that the 
Resurrection, to which the empty Tomb bore witness, and not 
the material Cross, was the basis of Christian belief. 

Eusebius relates ^ that, after the Council of Nicaea, Con- 
stantine, being inspired thereto by the Saviour, decided to make 
the place of the Resurrection "conspicuous and an object of 
veneration to all," and that he forthwith gave orders for the 
erection of a house of prayer. The Emperor, " inspired by the 
Divine Spirit,"* directed that the spot should be purified, for 
impious men, hoping to conceal the truth, had covered up " the 
sacred cave," and built above it a shrine dedicated to Aphrodite. 
When the shrine and its sub-structures were cleared away, and 
the natural surface of the ground was exposed, "immediately, 
and contrary to all expectation, the venerable and hallowed 
monument of our Saviour's Resurrection became visible." The 
Emperor then ordered a house of prayer to be erected round 
^* the sacred cave," on a scale of Imperial magnificence. 

After describing the discovery of the Tomb, Eusebius quotes 
a, letter from Constantine to Macarius, which was apparently 
written with full knowledge that the Cross had been found. 
The Emperor writes that " No power of language seems adequate 

^ Appendix V., 1, ix. 

^ It may be remarked that Jerome, although he mentions the Cross, 
makes no allusion to its discoyerj. Possibly he gave little weight to the 
legends connected with the incident. 

^ Appendix V., 1, i-XTi. 

* See note, p. 80. 

F 2 


to describe the present wonder. For that the token of that 
most holy Passion,^ long ago buried underground, should have 
remained unknown for so many years .... truly transcends 
all marvel .... I desire then that you should especially be 
convinced .... that of all things it is most my care how we 
may adorn with splendour of buildings that sacred spot which, 
under Divine direction, I relieved, as it were, of the heavy 
weight of foul idol worship — a place holy indeed from the 
beginning, but which has been made to appear still more holy 
since it brought to light the assurance of the Saviour's Passion."'^ 
Instructions are then given for the construction of a basilica; 
" For it is just that the place which is more wonderful than the 
whole world should be worthily decorated." ^ 

After stating that the instructions of Constantine were 
carried out, Eusebius writes : " So on the monument of salvation 
itself was the New Jerusalem built, over against the one so 
famous of old .... Opposite this the Emperor reared, with 
rich and lavish expenditure, the trophy of the Saviour's victory 
over death * . . . . and first of all he adorned the sacred cave, 

1 Thifl is evidently the Cross. The " token " of the Passion is the Cross, 
not the Tomb, and the " present wonder " may be its discovery after it had 
lain buried for nearly 300 years, — the implied previous " wonder " being the 
recovery of the Tomb in perfect preservation. 

^ The meaning seems to be that, in the Emperor's opinion, the Tomb, 
holy as it was in itself, had been made still more holy by the discovery in 
its immediate vicinity of the Cross — the token, or assurance, of the Saviour's 

3 It seems clear from the previous order to build a church round the 
Tomb, and from the similarity of the decorative details of this church to 
those of the basilica that was actually built (Appendix Y., 1, vii, viii, xii), 
that the Emperor intended to build, in addition to the church round the Tomb, 
a large church above the spot where the Cross was found, a place " more 
wonderful than the whole world." If, however, the letter refers to one 
church only, the explanation may be that the Emperor originally intended 
to include all the " holy places '* in one great church, and that he afterwards 
approved of a plan for erecting two churches submitted to him by his 
architect after a study of the ground. 

* This expression is apparently applied by Eusebius (Appendix V., 
1, XX, xxi) and Cyril to the Cross (see Appendix VI.). ** New Jerusalem " 
may be compared with ** New Rome," the name of the new capital on the 
Bosporus, afterwards known as Constantinople. 


which was, as it were, the chief part of the whole work." 
Eastward of the cave " the basilica was erected, an extraordinary 
work " of great height and extent. In a later chapter ^ the two 
churches, with their adjuncts, are, apparently, called a "temple," 
raised as a " conspicuous monument of the Saviour's Eesur- 

Eusebius, it will be observed, writes as if it were well 
known to everyone that the Tomb lay beneath the temple of 
Aphrodite. He expresses no doubt as to its authenticity, and 
makes no allusion to an enquiry by Macarius, or by any 
government ojfi&cial, with regard to the scene of the Cruci- 
fixion and Kesurrection. Constantine, according to him, is 
inspired by Christ to make the Tomb a "holy place," and 
at once issues orders for the removal of the temple and its sub- 
structures. The historian certainly says that, when the clearance 
was made, the Tomb was exposed to view "contrary to all 
expectation " ; but this may only mean that there was a tradi- 
tion that the " sacred cave " had been destroyed, or injured, 
when the temple was built, and that those who superintended 
the excavation were astonished to find it perfectly preserved. 
The expression may be understood in the sense in which it 
might be applied to the remarkable discoveries of Schliemann. 
The distinguished archaeologist knew where to excavate, and 
found the objects of his search, although no one expected him to 
do so. 

Is this an accurate account of what occurred, or is it a 
compromise between the necessary avoidance of anything 
likely to give offence to the Imperial family, and a strong 
desire on the part of the historian to dissociate himself from 
the steps that were taken to find and identify the Cross ? 
There is some reason for thinking that the latter may have 
been the case. 

Constantine was a man of imperious temper, who brooked 
no resistance to his will. He was successful in all his under- 

^ Appendix V., 1, xri. 


takings, and believed that his success was due to intercourse 
with the Deity,^ through the medium of dreams and visions, 
which were to him what "the voices" were to the Maid of 
Orleans. His belief in a Divine vocation seems to have been 
very real, and it was encouraged rather than discouraged by his 
Christian advisers. He had seen the sign of the Cross in the 
sky,* had placed it upon the standards of his army and upon the 
shields of his soldiers, and, through it, had gotten a great victory 
and the empire of the world. His training, his methods of 
thought were those of the West, and until he came to the East 
he was under the guidance of Western bishops, and was 
acquainted with Western Christianity alone.s He had all the 
materialistic tendency of the Latin, and more especially of the 
Roman mind ; and this tendency would, almost naturally, lead 
him to order a search to be made for the Cross.* The view, 
suggested by Eusebius, that the prime motive of the Divine 
inspiration was the discovery and decoration of the Tomb, must be 
accepted with reserve. It was the Cross and not the Tomb which 
influenced the decision of the Emperor at critical moments, and 
in the salutary power of which he firmly believed.^ Can it be 
supposed that in consequence of a Divine inspiration, immediately 

' The inscription on the triumphal arch erected by Gonstantine to oom- 
memorate his victory of the Milvian bridge, dedicated a.d. 315, has the 
words Instinciu Divinitatis. Writers aUude to liim as being divino manitv^ 
instinctu; and he himself, in his letter to Macarius, writes that his action 
was due to " Divino direction *' (see p. 84). 

' The importance attached to this yision is indicated by the legend 
iy tovrtfi pUa, so frequently found on ancient crosses. 

^ It was only after he became sole Emperor, a.d. 323, that he was 
brought into close contact with the Christianity of the East. 

* The search may have been partly due to political motires. The 
Emperor may have thought that as the sign of the Cross had given him 
victory in the field, so the Cross itself, if found, would be a rallying point 
for Christians, and heal the dissensions in the Church. 

^ On a statue of himself, holding a spear which terminated in a cross, 
erected by the Emperor at Borne, an inscription proclaimed to all that by 
that salutary sign he had saved the city, and restored the senate and the 
Boman people to their ancient dignity and splendour (Eusebius, Sccle- 
Hastical Hutory, ix, 9; Life of Coiutantine, i, 40). 


after the Council of Nicaea, the Tomb took the first place in his 
thoughts and the Cross the second ? ^ 

The view that Constantine wished to find the Cross is 
indirectly supported by the rapid development of the cult of the 
Cross. Less than twenty-five years after the Emperor's death 
Cyril could write that the wood of the Cross had been 
" distributed piecemeal to all the world " ; ^ Julian was able to 
taunt the Christians with reverencing the Cross as a divinity ; 
and the heathen had come to regard it as a Christian idol no less 
materialistic than their own. 

The later Greek traditions are far more concerned with the 
discovery of the three crosses, and the identification of the true 
Cross than they are with the recovery of the Tomb, and in these 
traditions the principal figure is not the Emperor but his mother, 
the Empress Helena. Thus in the fourth and fifth centuries 
Socrates ^ attributes the recovery of the Tomb and the Cross to 
Helena, assisted by Macarius. Sozomen says ^ that her zeal for 
Christianity made her anxious when at Jerusalem to find the 
wood of the Cross; and Theodoret states ^ that she was the 
bearer of Constantine's letter to Macarius, and discovered the 
Cross. In the sixth century Alexander Monachus writes ^ that 
Constantine ordered Macarius to find the Cross, the Tomb, and 
sacred relics, and that he sent his mother, at her own request, to 
Jerusalem that she and the bishop might search together for 
the Cross. According to Theophanes ^ the Emperor ordered 

' If the Emperor had regarded the Resurrection as the central point 
of interest, the building, the Anastasis, which commemorated it, would 
not have been subordinated to another structure, the Basilica, by which 
it must have been dwarfed, and from some points of view almost hidden. 
For the Cross and Constantine, see Clos, Kreuz und Gh-ab Jesu; Wace 
and Schaff , Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, vol. i ; Dictionary of Christian 
Biography, Art. '* Constantinus." 

* " The whole world is filled with the portions of the wood of the 
Cross " {Catechetical Lectures, iy, 10) ; the wood of the Cross confutes me 
which, from hence, has been distributed piecemeal to all the world " [Gate- 
chetical Lectures, xiii, 4). 

' Appendix V., 3, i. * Appendix V., 2, i. 

* Appendix V., 4, iii. ^ Appendix V., 5, iii. 
' Appendix V., 8, i. 


Macarius, on his return to Jerusalem from Nicaea, to search out 
" the place of the holy Eesurrection, and Golgotha, the place of 
the Skull, and the life-giving wood (of the Cross)." 

The Latin tradition of the fourth and fifth centuries is, that 
Helena on her arrival at Jerusalem made inquiry with regard to 
the place of the Crucifixion, and that when its situation was 
pointed out to her, she had the superincumbent buildings and 
earth removed, and found the three crosses. The Cross of Christ 
was then identified with the aid of Macarius.^ 

Assuming that the object of Constantine was to find the 
Cross, and that the Bishop of Jerusalem was instructed to search 
for it, the first step would obviously be to recover Golgotha and 
the Tomb. In no other locality could there have been any 
chance of success.^ Was the situation of the two places known 
to Macarius ? A consideration of the history of Jerusalem and 
of the early Church has suggested (see p. 79) that the survival of 
any tradition with regard to them to the time of Constantine is 
improbable, but not impossible. Eusebius does not mention a 
tradition, but he says nothing that is inconsistent with a previous 
knowledge of the place, and his narrative, taken by itself, may 
perhaps be held to support the view that the position of the 
Tomb was known. On the other hand, the impression produced 
by the works of later writers is that, although there may have 
been some recollection of Golgotha amongst the inhabitants of 
Jerusalem, there was no certain knowledge of its exact situation. 
It is true that these later writers were not eye-witnesses, and that 
they only relate what had become known to them through 
tradition, but they had access to the archives of the Church, and 

* Appendix V., 11, iii ; 12, ii. The account of the identification of the 
true Cross giren by Severus is possibly that authorised by Macarius. It 
states that the body of a dead man, on its way to the grave, was carried to 
the spot where the crosses were found, and that when removed from the bier 
and placed in contact with the Cross of Christ, it stood upright. The 
story that the three crosses were carried to the room of a sick lady 
seems to be an exaggeration of the official account. 

2 The custom of the Jews was to bury the cross upon which anyone was 
hanged with the body (Lightfoof, Horae Sehrxicae et Talmudicx, on Act6 
viii, 1). 


their statements, especially those which are common to all, must 
have had some foundation in fact. 

Amongst Greek writers, Socrates says^ that Helena 
recovered the Tomb, " after much difficulty." Sozomen states ^ 
that "it was no easy matter" to discover the Cross and the 
Tomb, and that according to some their situation was pointed 
out to the Empress by an Oriental Jew, who derived his 
knowledge from family documents, but that the more probable 
view was that God revealed it "by means of signs and dreams." 
Alexander Monachus writes ^ that Helena, upon her arrival at 
Jerusalem, charged Macarius and his suflfragans to search for the 
Cross, and that being at a loss what to do, they offered prayers 
to God, and were answered by a miraculous revelation of the 
place to the bishop. In the letter of the Emperor Leo to Omar,* 
the site is said to have been disclosed by Jews under torture. 
According to Eufinus ^ the place of the Crucifixion was pointed 
out to Helena "by signs from heaven"; and according to 
Severus ^ the Empress, having first obtained the requisite 
information, had the spot cleared. Gregory of Tours says 7 that 
the Cross was pointed out to Helena by a Jew named Juda. 

It will be convenient at this point to sum up the evidence for 
and against the existence of a definite tradition. In support of 
the view that the " holy places " were well known to the Christian 
■community at Jerusalem, it may be urged that during the three 
centuries which followed their recovery the authenticity of the 
sites was never questioned by Jews or heathen, and that the 
•Christians would not have acquiesced in identifications which 
they knew to be false. Even Julian, and those who taunted the 
Christians with worshipping the Cross as an idol, so far as is 
known, accepted their recovery as genuine; and no accusation 

^ Appendix V., 3, i. * Appendix V., 7. 

^ Appendix V., 2, i. ^ Appendix V., 12, ii. 

3 Appendix V., 5, iii. ® Appendix V., 11, iii. 

' Appendix V., 16. The legend of the discovery of the Cross by Judas 
for Helena has come down in Syriac^ Greek, and Latin yersions; and 
Nestle considers that the original Helena legend was in Sjriar. 


was brought against Macarius of perpetrating a " pious fraud " ^ 
during the period when a deliberate fraud, if there were one, 
would hardly have escaped detection. Eusebius writes as if the 
position of the Tomb were well known, or, at any rate, as if 
there were no difficulty in finding it. The Greek and Latin 
writers of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries mention no 
miracle in connection with its recovery, such as that which 
attended the identification of the true Cross. If the site of the 
Tomb had been lost, or if there had been any doubt on the 
subject, Constantine, it has been argued, would have ordered 
a preliminary inquiry and search, but of this there is no trace in 
the writings of Eusebius, the only eye-witness. The selection of 
an inconvenient site on the slope of a rocky hill, where extensive 
quarrying would be necessary for the erection of a large church, 
must have been due to the existence of a tradition. ^ If Macarius 
and his suffragans had acted upon mere caprice, if they had 
believed that Golgotha was a rounded hill-top, or if the Emperor 
had instructed them simply to erect churches in remembrance of 
the Passion and the Resurrection, they would have chosen a 
conspicuous spot, such as a knoll with a conveniently situated 
Jewish sepulchre, and not a tomb in an ancient cemetery within 
the walls of Hadrian's city. In all probability, also, they would 
have left the tomb intact, and made an effort to preserve the 
appearance of reality, instead of cutting away the rock so as to 
leave that portion of the Tomb only upon which the body of the 
Lord had rested. 

The supporters of the opposite view maintain that there is no 

* Taylor (Ancient Christianity ^ ii, 277) imputes deliberate fraud to 
Macarius ; but it is impossible to belieye that the bishop could have had a 
cave hewn out of the rock beneath a pagan shrine, and that the heathen 
would have assented to the fraud. 

' Finlay's argument (History of Greece, i, Ap. iii) that the minute registra- 
tion of landed property in the Roman Empire and the provinces, and the 
maps connected with it, would have enabled Macarius to identity the garden 
of Joseph, must not be pressed too far. The condition of Jerusalem before 
the siege by Titus was not such as to facilitate the execution of a cadastral 
survey by the Komans, and all the city archives were destroyed during the 
war. A later survey would be of little value for purposes of identification. 


positive proof of a definite tradition, and that the story of the 
recovery of the "holy places" has not sujfficient guarantees to 
justify its acceptance. For three centunes after the time of 
Constantine no writers refer to a tradition, or advance any 
argument in favour of the sites, and most of them consider it 
necessary to ascribe their recovery to an inspiration or to Divine 
guidance. Nor, excepting the allusion by Eusebius, in his 
Theophania,^ to " one cavern," is mention made of any mark or 
sign by which the Tomb that was uncovered was known to be 
that of Christ. The silence of Eusebius with regard to a tradi- 
tion is no more a proof that there was one, than his omission 
to mention the discovery of the Cross, and the part played by 
Helena in the transactions at Jerusalem is evidence that the 
Cross was not found when the "holy places" were recovered, 
and that the Empress was not present during the operations 
which led to their recovery. It may plausibly be suggested 
that the historian disapproved of the proceedings, and that his 
silence with regard to many details is due to his honesty, and to 
a feeling that, in view of the ofiicial recognition of Christianity 
as the religion of the State, he was obliged to accept the broad 
outlines of the situation created by the Imperial order to find 
the Cross. The writers later than Constantine convey the 
impression that nothing was certainly known with regard to the 
position of Golgotha, and that an inquiry of some kind preceded 
its recovery. The fact that Macarius sought for and found a 
cave benfeath the temple of Aphrodite, is no proof that the cave ^ 
was the Sepulchre of Christ, or that there was a tradition with 
regard to it. The existence of a Jewish cemetery at the spot 
must have been a matter of common knowledge, and it would 
have been a very natural inference from the well-known 
characteristics of such cemeteries that there was a Tomb 
beneath the temple.**^ Macarius very possibly formed a 

* Appendix V., 1, xxiii. 

* It is remarkable that Eusebius generally uses the word &yrpov, cave^ for 
the Sepulchre, and not the usual rdpos (see Appendix YI.). 

'The statement of Eusebius that impious men " set themselves to consign 
[the Tomb] to darkness and oblivion " (Appendix Y., 1, ii), hardly means 


theory with regard to the site of Golgotha after more careful 
consideration than has been given to the subject by some modern 
theorists, and it is most unlikely that anyone in the fourth 
century would question an identification accepted by a bishop 
and his suffragans. There is every reason to believe that Macarius 
acted in good faith, and an attempt will be made later to discover 
the reasons which led him to fix upon the traditional sites ; but 
the fact that the scene of the Transfiguration,^ and the sites of 
the battle in which David slew Goliath,^ and of Kephidim,^ were 
wrongly identified in the early part of the fourth century, 
suggests the possibility that the bishop may have made a mis- 
take.* It may be added that the cutting away of the rock 
round the traditional Tomb, if it did not arise from the architect's 
wish to produce a certain effect, may have been due to a desire 
to obliterate all traces of the original features of the ground. 

The only possible conclusion, from a discussion of the literary 
evidence, seems to be that there is no decisive reason for placing 
Golgotha and the Tomb at the places which were accepted as 
genuine in the fourth century, and that there is no distinct 
proof that they were not so situated. Fortunately the question 
is purely archaeological, and its solution, one way or the other, 
does not affect any Christian dogma or article of faith. 

On the supposition that there was no definite tradition with 
regard to the position of Golgotha, can any reason be suggested 
for the selection of the present site by Macarius 1 

as Robinson contends (Biblical Researches, i, 414), that the site was for- 

^ The Bordeaux Pilgrim. 

2 Ibid. 

^ St. Silyia, Filgrimage to the Holy Places. 

* Robinson lays much stress (Biblical Researches, i, 415, 416) upon the 
identification by Eusebius of the summit of the Mount of Olives as the scene 
of the Ascension, which he places at Bethany. But Eusebius connects the 
Ascension with the spot where Christ taught his disciples (Appendx IV., 8, 
xii), and the words *' he led them out until they were over against Bethany " 
(Luke xxiv, 50), compared with Acts i, 12, "then returned they . . . from 
the mount called Olivet," are not opposed to the view that Christ ascended 
from some spot on the Mount of Olives. 


Allusion has already been made (see p. 17) to the possibility of 
some connection between Golgotha and the name -^lia Capitolina. 
According to a fanciful etymology, the word Capitolium is 
derived from the head or skull of a certain Olus, or Tolus, cap.U 
on regis, which was discovered when the rock of the summit of 
the Capitoline Hill at Eome ^ was excavated for the foundations 
of the temple of Jupiter ; and there is an ancient legend that 
Golgotha was so called from the skull of Adam, which was 
buried in a tomb beneath the "rock of the Cross." The two 
words Capitolmm and Golgotha have the same meaning, and the 
Capitolium was regarded at Eome, as Golgotha was at Jerusalem^ 
as the chief place or centre of the world. 

On the Capitoline Hill at Eome, near the temple of Mars^ 
stood a temple of Venus Capitolina ; and above the assumed rock 
of Golgotha rose a temple of Venus, or Aphrodite, the Syrian 
Astarte. At Eome the goddess was known as Venus Victrix, the 
giver of victory to lovers and Eoman armies, and she was called 
Caha, " the bald," a word from which Calvaria, " Calvary," is 
derived. One of the chief seats of the worship of the Oriental 
Aphrodite, or Astarte, was Golgi ^ — the same word as Golgotha — 
in Cyprus. In building the great temple of Venus and Eome at 
the capital, Hadrian identified the goddess with the well-being of 
the State. The crowned goddess of the imperial coins of -^lia 
Capitolina ^ has been called Astarte by De Saulcy, Madden, and 

* The connection of a head, or skull, with a city is not uncommon, e.g., 
that of the head of St. John the Baptist with Samaria, Damascus, and 
Emesa. Compare also the legends connected with the heads of Bel, Dionysos,. 
Orpheus, and Osiris, and the oracle-giTing head of Harr^n. 

2 ToKyol, T6\yios, from T6\yo5 (Q-olgos), the son of Aphrodite and 
Adonis, and the reputed founder of the town ; or, according to Sepp 
{D<i9 heilige Land^ i, 419), from the rock-cones (Heb., Oalgal, Golgol} 
which played an important part in the rites connected with the worship of 
the goddess who was called yoKyuiv Avacrcra. The ruins of the large temple 
of Aphrodite, or Astarte, in Cyprus, was excavated in 1871. 

^ On the coins of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and their successors (see 
PI. YI), the goddess is represented standing, sometimes alone, sometimes 
in a temple, with a sceptre or spear in her left hand, a human head in her 
outstretched right hand, and with her right foot on a human figure. The 
head is supposed by some writers to be that of Adonis, and the human 
figure to be a riyer-god or a yanquished Jew, 


others, but this identification is by no means certain. The type 
occurs at cities where Astarte is impossible, and the figure is 
apparently the local Tyche, or city-goddess, holding in her hand 
the head or bust of the reigning Emperor,^ and resting on a 

It may be inferred from the expressions " a gloomy shrine of 
lifeless idols," and "profane and accursed altars," used by 
Eusebiu8,2 that the temple of Aphrodite at Jerusalem contained 
several statues, and it has been suggested (see p. 63) that one of 
them may have been a representation of Jupiter.^ Is it possible 
that we have here the Capitolium of ^lia Gapitolina containing, 
like the Capitolia of other large towns of the Empire («.^., 
Carthage), a temple of Jupiter and Venus ; and, if so, could the 
legend of the skull of Adam, and even the name Golgotha, have 
had their origin in the Jerusalem Capitol ? 

The manner in which Jerome connects Jupiter and Venus 
with the Tomb and Golgotha (see p. 64), suggests the idea that 
the Capitolium of ^lia was at Golgotha. But the statement of 
Dion Cassius (see p. 62), that Hadrian built a temple of Jupiter 
Capitolinus on the site of the Temple of God, supported as it 
is by the reference of Jerome to a statue of Jupiter in the 
Temple precincts, is strong, but not conclusive evidence that the 

* I am indebted for this suggestion to Dr. Barclay V. Head, Keeper of 
Coins, &c., at the British Museum, who has referred me to "a coin of 
Cremna in Fisidia " (British Museum Catalogue^ p. 218 and cii) : reverse, 
FORTUN. COL. CREMN., with this type of Fortuna crowned, with sceptre 
in left and human head in outstretched right hand, and with right foot on 
upper part of human figure. Also a coin of Ed Dera'ah (Edrei), in (the 
Province) Arabia (De Saulcy, Nttmismatique de la Terre Sainte, p. 374), 
where a coin of the same type bears the inscription, AAPAHNU)N 


^ Appendix V., 1, ii. 

^ Sepp suggests {Jerusalem und das Heilige Land, i, 421) that the statue 
of Jupiter mentioned by Jerome and Fanliniis of Nola was really one of the 
Egyptian Serapis, whose head appears on coins of Antoninus and his suc- 
cessors. It would appear from a dedicatory inscription at the Sion Q-ate 
that Serapis was worshipped at Jerusalem in the reign of Trajan, while the 
city was still only a Roman camp. The temple of Serapis was probably 
ontside tlie south wall of the camp, and not far from the Sion Qtite. 
{Quarterly Statement, 1895, pp. 25, 130; 1896, pp. 133-152). 


Capitolium was on Mount Moriah. The view that the Capitolium 
gave rise to the name Golgotha and to the Adam legend involves 
the theory that the spot where Christ suffered was situated in 
the Capitolium of ^lia ; that the place was first called Golgotha 
in the second century ; and, as a consequence, that the references 
in the Gospels to the " place of the skull," and " the skull," were 
inserted in the text at a later date than the reign of Hadrian. 
But the general tendency of recent criticism has been to 
strengthen the opinion that the Gospels assumed their present 
form long before Hadrian came to the throne, and, apart from 
this, it is not easy to believe that the place of the Crucifixion 
only received its distinctive Aramaic name a century after the 
death of Christ, and that Golgotha was then, for the first time, 
mentioned in the Gospels.^ The Adam legend is, in all proba- 
bility, of much earlier date than the second century (see p. 6). 
There would then appear to be no direct etymological relation 
between Golgotha and the Capitolium of uElia, and no reason to 
believe that the name Golgotha was derived from, or caused by, 
the Capitolium. 

The view that Golgotha was well known in the time of 
Hadrian, and that, apart from any hostile feeling towards the 
Christians, the name itself would have led to the selection of the 
spot for the erection of a temple of Venus, has been advanced by 
Sepp.2 But the evidence of a continuous tradition is so uncertain 
that the alternative theory, that the presence of the temple 
influenced, to a certain degree, the identification of Golgotha 
with the present site, seems preferable. 

The Church historians later than Eusebius evidently believed 
that some inquiry preceded the identification (see p. 89). There 
may, perhaps, have been some vague idea amongst the Jews of 
Palestine ^ that Golgotha lay to the north of the citadel, and the 

^ The slight variations of wording in Matt, xxyii, 33, Mark xy, 22, and 
John xix, 17, and the omission of the word Golgotha in Luke xxiii, 33, seems 
opposed to the theory of an authorised interpolation at such a late period. 

^ Jerusalem und das Heilige Land^ i, 420. 

^ See the statement by Sozomen (Appendix V., 2, i, and the quaint Syrian 
legend given by Abu el-Faraj in his Ecclesiastical History, 


castle of Antonia, which protected the Temple, having been 
destroyed, Macarius may have taken it for granted that the citadel 
referred to was on the western hill. On this hill the three towers 
left standing by Titus marked the position of Herod's fortified 
palace; and to the north of the towers lay an ancient Jewish 
cemetery, which possibly included amongst the rock-hewn tombs 
the sepulchre of John the High Priest. In the midst of the 
cemetery, and partly covering it, stood a temple of Venus. May 
not Macarius, in his selection of the present site, have been 
influenced, in the absence of any definite tradition, partly by an 
uncertain legend of Jewish origin (see p. 6), partly by the 
existence of an ancient cemetery north of the three towers, and 
partly by a fancied connection between Golgotha and Golgi, 
suggested by the temple ? The solution proposed above is 
put forward with some hesitation as an alternative to the 
probable view that the Bishop simply made a guess at the site^ 
and that his identification was accepted at once, and without 
question, by Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Syrian Christians. 

The history of the oflBcial identification of Golgotha and the 
Tomb is not fully known, and an attempt to reconstruct it is 
perhaps hazardous. But the importance attached by the Church 
historians of the latter part of the fourth and beginning of the 
fifth century to the action of the Empress Helena, and to the 
discovery of the Cross, seems to need some explanation. The 
statements in the early ecclesiastical histories must have had 
some foundation in fact, and the theory which seems best to meet 
the difficulties of the case may be stated as follows : — 

1. After the Council of Nicaja, Constantine, for motives to 
which allusion has already been made (see p. 86), commanded 
Macarius, who was then returning to Jerusalem, to search for 
the Cross of Christ. 

2. The first step was to find the place of the Crucifixion, 
near which, under ordinary circumstances, the Cross would have 
been buried or cast aside. Macarius, after consultation with 
his suffragans, and after making inquiry amongst the native 


Christians and Jews, came to the conclusion that Golgotha lay 
beneath the temple of Aphrodite. 

3. Constantino, having been informed by Macarius of the 
result of this investigation, sent his mother, the Empress Helena, 
to Jerusalem with full power to demolish buildings and make 
the necessary search. 

4. The Empress, on her arrival at Jerusalem, employed 
labourers and soldiers to clear away the temple of Aphrodite 
and its substructures. By this means a portion of the ancient 
Jewish cemetery, hitherto concealed from view, was uncovered, 
and a rock-hewn tomb,^ prepared for the reception of a single 
body, was identified as that in which the body of Christ had 
rested. A spot on the terrace above (see p. 36) was at the 
same time assumed to be Golgotha. 

5. Constantine, on being informed of the discovery, ordered 
the erection of a church which should enclose the Tomb. Mean- 
time the excavations were continued with unabated vigour, and 
at last the three crosses, the nails, and the title, which had be- 
come separated from Christ's Cross, were found. The true Cross 
was then identified by its " life-giving " properties. 

6. The Emperor, on hearing of the recovery of the Cross, 
wrote the letter preserved by Eusebius,^ in which Macarius was 
directed to build two churches with lavish magnificence. 

7. The rock was cut away so as to isolate the Tomb and 
Golgotha, and the Anastasis, or Church of the Kesurrection, and 
the Martyrion, or Great Church of the Cross, were built.^ 

The Second Wall, — The question whether the site of the 
Church of the Holy Sepulchre was inside or outside the second 

^ It has been suggested by Conder {Quarterly Statement y 1883, p. 72) 
that the Tomb was an ancient Mithraeum, which was reconsecrated by 
Macarius as the Sepulchre of Christ. But there seems no reason for the 
selection of a Mithraic or Adonisiac cave by Macarius when there were so 
many tombs close at hand. Nor does it seem likely that the builders of the 
temple of Aphrodite would have turned a Jewish tomb into a caye of Adonis. 

'^ Appendix V., 1, vi, vii. 

' The theory stated above is that of Clos {Kreuz und Grab Jesu, p. 7), 
slightly modiBed. 



wall of Josephus is one that cannot be answered, at present, with 
any degree of certainty. Some of the views which have been 
advanced with regard to the wall are discussed in Chap. XI. It 
will be suflBcient to state here that so far as the topographical 
features are concerned, it may have excluded or included the 
ground upon which the church stands.^ The archaeological 
evidence is equally unsatisfactory. There is no sufficient proof 
that the masses of masonry which are supposed to have formed 
part of the second wall ever belonged to it. In some instances 
the masonry is almost certainly of later date. 

A strong argument in favour of the opinion that the site of 
the church was outside the wall is its selection by Macarius. The 
search for Golgotha and the Cross was ordered by the Emperor, 
and it may be regarded as a public work carried out by the State. 
Supposing that the remains of the wall were then visible,^ is it 
at all likely that the Bishop and his advisers would have 
deliberately placed Golgotha inside the wall, when every educated 
Christian knew that Christ had suffered "without the gate"1 
Would the higher clergy throughout the Empire, who were at 
variance upon many points, have accepted without protest a site 
that was obviously impossible ? 

On the other hand, it may fairly be urged that Josephus, 
who, in his description of the^rs^ and third walls, mentions places 
near to, or through which they passed, would almost certainly 
have referred to Golgotha in connection with the seamd wall if it 

^ The view that any wall excluding the church must have had a faidty 
trace is hardly correct. There are Greek towns in Asia Minor where the 
city walls or parts of them are quite as badly traced according to modem 
ideas. For some of the general principles upon which ancient fortifications 
were constructed, see p. 121. 

^ The curious and rather obscure reference of Cyril to the Tomb seems 
to place it near the " outer wall " j but whether the wall referred to was the 
second or third wall of Josephus, or the wall of Hadrian, is uncertain. 
*' But where is the rock which has in it this cleft (or caye) ? Lies it in the 
midst of the city, or near the walls and the outskirts ; and is it in the 
ancient walls, or in the outer walls which were built afterwards ? He says 
then in the Canticles (ii, 14), In the cleft of the rock near the outer toaU " 
(Appendix V., 16, iii). 


had been a well-known spot, and close to a marked change of 
direction in the wall. 

Several writers have assumed that because the Church of the 
Holy Sepulchre is built in a Jewish cemetery, the site must have 
been outside the second wall. This assumption would be true 
only if the tombs were of later date than the Captivity. Intra- 
mural burial was not uncommon in the time of the Jewish 
monarchy, and there is no trace of any aversion to it in the 
historical books of the Bible.^ In post-Exilic times no one was 
buried within the city walls. In the ground occupied by 
Constantine's buildings, there are still to be seen the remains of 
two rock-hewn tombs. One, the so-called " Tomb of Nicodemus," 
contains several kokimy or " oven-shaped " graves ; the other, in 
the Coptic Convent close to the " Prison of Christ," has " bench " 
graves. There is not, at present, sufficient evidence to enable 
anyone to date, accurately, the various descriptions of Jewish 
rock-hewn tombs in and around Jerusalem. But Mr. Macalister's 
scientific examination of the cemeteries at Gezer,^ supplies data 
which if confirmed by excavations at other sites, may throw a 
flood of light upon this obscure subject. At Gezer it was found 
that no tomb earlier in date than the Captivity contained kohim ; 
but that in all post-Exilic tombs the receptacles provided for the 
dead were kokim. It is hardly safe to infer that what is true of 
the tombs of a provincial town is equally true of those of the 
capital. But it is very significant to find such a complete change 
in the character of Jewish rock-hewn tombs immediately after 
the return from Captivity. It is evident that if all kohim graves 
are post-Exilic, the " tomb of Nicodemus " must belong to that 
period, and the traditional sites must have been outside the 
secovd wall, and beyond the limits of the city at the time of the 

^ The post-Exilic Jews were well aware that there were hidden tombs 
within the city. It is stated in the Mishna that " the buildings of Jerusalem 
were founded on the rock, with caves under them, because of the sepulchre 
of the abyss" — that is, hidden tombs of unknown depth (Maimonidoa. 
Jfezir, ix, 2 ; quoted by Hanauer in Qaarterly Statement^ 1892, p. 306). 

^ Quart&rhf Statement^ 1904, pp. 324-854. 

G 2 


Natural Features of the Ground covered hy the Church of the Holy 
Sepulchre. — Is there anything in the nature of the ground upon 
which the church stands which renders it an impossible site for 
Golgotha and the Tomb ? The rock was so cut away for the 
construction of Constantine's churches, and it is so covered with 
rubbish and buildings in the vicinity of the present church, that 
the original form of the ground cannot be accurately ascertained. 
Originally the hillside must have risen up in a series of terraces 
of greater or less height according to the thickness of the strata 
(see p. 26) ; and there appear to be traces of two such terraces in 
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and its immediate vicinity. 
The level of the upper terrace is marked by the top of the rock 
of Golgotha, and its vertical face, now cut away, evidently con- 
tained the entrances to several tombs.^ Amongst these tombs, 
that known as the "Tomb of Nicodemus,"^ and that in the 
Coptic Convent,^ north of the " Prison of Christ," are genuine 
Jewish tombs of not later date than the time of Christ. The 
first was entered on the level of the lower terrace, and a few 
steps led down to the second. Other tombs, of which the form 
can no longer be traced, were the present Holy Sepulchre, and 
possibly the "Tomb of Adam" and the "Prison of Christ."* In 
. the same terrace, or in the one above, it was probably the tomb 
of John the High Priest, which is mentioned by Josephus in 
connection with the siege by Titus. In front of these tombs was 
the level surface of the lower terrace, utilised as a garden,^ and 
probably planted with shrubs or trees. The vertical face of this 
terrace can be seen in the houses built against it on the west side 
of the street Khd,n ez-Zeit. So far then as the form and nature 

^ Terraces with tombs in their yertieal faces may be seen in the Valley 
of Hinnom, and elsewhere near Jerusalem (PL III.). 

^ For a description of this tomb and its tomb cliambers, see Palestine 
Fund Memoirs, Jerusalem Vol., pp. 319-329, and Quarterly Statement, 
1877, pp. 76-84, 128-132 j Clermont-G^anneau, V Autheiiticite du St. SSpulcre^ 

^ Quarterly Statement, 1887, pp. 154, 156. 

^ These places and the two tombs mentioned are all on the same level. 

^ The existence of the garden is attested by Cyril (Appendix V., 16, ii). 


of the ground are concerned, there is nothing impossible in the 
view that Christ was crucified on the surface of the upper terrace 
(Golgotha) and buried in a tomb in its vertical face. A tomb in 
this position would be in the " place " Golgotha, and its entrance 
in " the garden " of the lower terrace.^ 

The form of the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea is unknown, 
and various attempts have been made to reconstruct it. A 
discussion of the whole subject is unnecessary in this place. 
My own view is that Joseph's tomb was an ordinary rock-hewn 
sepulchre in the vertical face of a rock terrace, with an entrance, 
Ovpa^ of the usual form and size. The sepulchre probably 
consisted of an ante-chamber,* round which ran a low bench of 
the usual type, and of a tomb-chamber in which there was at the 
time only one grave. ^ The ante-chamber was entered on the 
level from the terrace or garden outside, and an opening in one 
of its sides led to the tomb-chamber. There is nothing in the 
Bible to show whether the entrance to the Tomb had a vestibule, 
or whether the grave was a "bench" grave, an "oven-shaped" 
grave Qcok\ or a "trough" grave. The present "Holy 
Sepulchre " may have been either.* The body of Christ was 
probaby laid on the bench of the ante-chamber imtil the Sabbath 
was over. There is no evidence that the entrance to the Tomb 
was secured by a concealed rolling stone ^ like that at the " Tombs 

^ The suggested relationship between tlie place of crucifixion and the 
tomb may be seen in the photographs of tombs with terrace-gardens on 
PL III. A man crucified on the upper terrace could easily be buried in one 
of the tombs beneath. 

2 It is not quite clear whether Cyril refers (Appendix V., 16, iii) 
to an ante-chamber or to a yestibule, when he writes that " the outer cave " 
had been cut away to allow of the decorations of the Holy Sepulchre. 

^ It may perhaps be inferred from the description of the Holy Sepulchre 
by Eusebius in the Theophania (Appendix V., 1, xxiii), that there was only 
one grave in the traditional tomb. 

^ See note on the Tomb of Nicodemus {Quarterly Statement ^ 1877, 
pp. 12&-132). 

^ According to Keim^ the great stone of the Gospels was simply the 
Jewish Golal, which is often mentioned by the Talmudists, antiquam 
claudatur golal super eo. The words vpoa^KuXita, i.iro-Kv\liaf ava'KvXioty used 
by Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not necessarily imply that the stone was 


of the Kings'' near Jerusalem, or by any other mechanical 
contrivance. It was probably closed, like most of the rock-hewn 
tombs, by a large stone, either carefully dressed and fitting into 
a reveal, or roughly hewn and rolled or pushed against the 

shaped like a large cheese, and was rolled backwards and forwards in a 
groove ; and St. Jolin's expression, " and seeth the stone taken away from 
the tomb " (John xx, 1), is quite applicable to a roughly-hewn stone. It is 
difficult to believe that the Greek word translated kSph&, " rock," in the 
Sjriac edition of the Theophania (Appendix Y., 1, xxiii) could hare been 
used by Eusebius to describe a cheese^shaped, rolling-stone, or that Cyril 
woidd hare had such a stone in view when he referred {Catechetical 
Lectures^ xiii, 89) to the ''stone which was laid on the door," b iirireBel ry 
hvpq, XiBos), Conder observes {Quarterly Statement y 1883, pp. 70, 78) that 
it is doubtful whether the expressions in the Gospel refer to a rolling stone, 
or to the temporary closing of a new tomb by a large rough mass of sto^e. 



Theories with regard to the Positions of Golgotha 

AND the Tomb. 

In this chapter some of the views of those earnest Christians 
of all denominations who, for various reasons, find themselves 
unable to accept the traditional sites as genuine are considered. 

The situation of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre within 
the modern city is, in itself, almost suggestive of doubt. 
Educated pilgrims to the Holy City are often sorely perplexed 
when they visit the " holy places " for the first time. They 
know that Christ sufiered without the gate. They find Golgotha 
within the walls of a small Oriental city and in close proximity 
to its thronged bazars. They may realise that Jerusalem of 
Herod was not a large city, and may believe that the ground 
upon which the church stands was outside the walls at the time 
of the Crucifixion ; but at the same time there lingers in their 
minds an uneasy feeling with regard to the accuracy of the 
received tradition. They see little in the church that seems to 
be in complete harmony with the familiar Gospel narrative. 
The features of the groimd have been so altered, there has been 
so much building, and the " holy places " are so obscured by 
decorative and votive offerings, that a strong effort of the 
imagination is required to restore the form of groimd as it 
existed before the churches of Constantine were built. Many 
pilgrims, either from indolence or from want of knowledge, never 
attempt to make that effort. They form a hasty and unfavourable 
opinion upon a difficult and obscure question, and seek some spot 
which appeals more directly to the eye and to their preconceived 
ideas of the character and appearance of Golgotha. 


The date at which doubts with regard to the authenticity of 
the " holy places " first arose is unknown. But some explanation 
of their position within the walls seems to have been considered 
necessary as early as the eighth century. The quaint "statement 
of Willibald ^ {drca a.d. 754), that Calvary was formerly outside 
Jerusalem, "but Helena, when she found the Cross, arranged 
that place so as to be within the city," reads like a reply to the 
remarks of some doubting spirits of his age. A somewhat 
clearer appreciation of the situation is noticeable in the twelfth, 
thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries. Thus Saewulf^ (a.d. 
1102-3), Wilbrand von Oldenberg^ (a.d. 1212), Jacobus de 
Vitriaco* (Jacques de Vitry, circa A.D. 1226), Burchardus de 
Monte Sions (a.d. 1283), Odoricus de Foro Julii (Frejus)^ 
(a.d. 1320), and Guilielmus de Boldensele^ (a.d. 1332), main- 
tained that Hadrian, when he rebuilt Jerusalem, greatly 
enlarged the city and enclosed Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre, 
which were previously outside the walls. 

There would appear to have been for several centuries two 
conflicting views: one that the city had been moved from its 
original position to the vicinity of the sepulchre,® the other held 
by those who impiously asserted that the tomb had been moved 
and not the city (Gretser., A.D. 1598).^ 

According to Jacques Le Saige of Douai (a.d. 1518), the 
representative of the Holy Sepulchre who went with pilgrims to 

* Palestine Filgrima^ Texts, vol. iii. 

2 "Pilgrimage to Jerusalem ; Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. iv. 

3 Itinerary to the Holy Land, ii, 6. 

* The History of Jerusalem, Ix; PdleHine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. xi. 

5 Description of the Holy Land^ ch. viii, "Jerusalem"; Palestine 
Pilgrims* Texts, vol. xii. 

^ Liber, de Terra Sancta, xv. 

7 Hodopasricon ad Terram Sanctum, Boldensele adds that the sepulchre 
was not the rock-hewn tomb in which the body of Christ had been laid, 
but was constructed of stones cemented together. 

^ Burchardus, l.c; see also Ludolph von Suchem, Description of the 
Holy Land, xxxviii ; Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. xii, 98 ; and Gretser, 
who quotes Pope Nicholas I. 

® Opera Omnia, vol. i ; De Sanvta Cruce, lib. i, cap. 17, " De loco in quo 
Dominus crucifixus est." 


Palestine insisted " que nous falloit avoir foy des Lieux-Saincts 
qu'on nous monstreroit, ou, se ne volKesme estre tels que ne 
prissiesme de palme."^ 

Quaresmius (a.d. 1639)2 alludes to and refutes those "befogged 
{or scoundrelly) western heretics " (nehuhnes Occidentales hm-eticos) 
who argued that the traditional Tomb could not be the true one 
because (1) it was inside the walls and almost in the middle of 
the city ; (2) Joseph of Arimathea would not have hewn his tomb 
near a place where criminals were executed and buried ; (3) a tomb 
west of the Holy Sepulchre was shown as that of Joseph, and 
should, therefore, according to the Bible, be the place in which 
the body of Jesus was laid, and (4) the bodies of criminals were 
thrown into a common tomb, and for this the traditional 
sepulchre was not suitable. Monconys^ (a.d. 1647) writes that 
Calvary, according to tradition, was outside Jerusalem, but that 
it was difficult to realise this, since the place was then in the 
centre of the city, which was much smaller than at the time of 
the Crucifixion. 

In the eighteenth century the authenticity of the "holy 
places " was vigorously attacked and denied by Jonas Korte,* a 
bookseller of Altona, who visited Jerusalem in a.d. 1738.. Korte's 
view is succinctly described in the title of one of the chapters of 
his book, " On Mount Calvary, which now lies in the middle of 
the town and cannot therefore be the true Calvary." He argues 
that the traditional Golgotha is too near the site of the Temple, 
^nd, since the Jerusalem of Herod covered a much larger area 
than the modern town, that it must have been inside and not 
outside the ancient city. The rejection of the traditional sites 
led, natually, to speculation with regard to the true position of 
Golgotha. Korte, on his plan, drew the first wall of Josephus a 

^ Voyage de Jacques Le Saige^ ed. Duthilloeul, p. 98. 

*^ Sluddafio Terras Sanctse^ lib. 5, cap. 14. 

^ Journal des Voyages ^ yol. i^ p. 307 ; see also J. Nieolai (a.d. 1706), 
De Sepulchris Mebraeorum, p. 221. 

* Jonas Korte's Meise nach dem wetland Oelohten .... Lande, 2nd ed., 
JL.D. 1743. Korte was the first to publish openly a declaration that the sites 
vere not authentic. 


little north of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and placed 
Golgotha on the right bank of the "Valley of Gihon" (Valley of 
Hinnom), on rising ground to the south-east of the " hohe Bninn " 
(Birket Mamilla), but gives no reason for his selection of that 
position. Since Korte's day Golgotha has been located north, 
south, east, and west of the city, and theorists who have con- 
sidered the selection of the traditional site to have been a 
"pious fraud" on the part of. Constantine's advisers, have 
convinced themselves that the true scene of the Passion is some 
locality which accords with their own preconceived ideas of 
the spot. 

The view of Korte was supported with much fulness of 
argument by Pleasing i (a.d. 1789), a Protestant clergyman of 
Wernigerode. Plessing maintained that, the west being regarded 
by the Jews as holy and worthy of honour, Christ suffered on 
the west side of the city,^ and his plan shows Golgotha on the 
east side of the Birket Mamilla, with the Holy Sepulchre a few 
yards to the south of it. Eenan considered that Golgotha was 
north-west of the city, and that it might have been near the 
north-west aiigle of the present wall, or on the heights (puttes) 
which command the Valley of Hinnom above the Birket 

Clarke (a.d. 1812) was able to find nothing in the Church of 
the Holy Sepulchre that could be " reconciled with the history of 
our Saviour's burial." He could not believe that "in the 
construction of a church to commemorate the existence of the 
Tomb she (Helena) would have levelled and cut away not only 
the Sepulchre itself, but also the whole of Mount Calvary,"* 

^ Ueber-jQ-ol^oiha utuL Christi Grab, Halle, a.d. 1789. 

^ Oonder, on the other hand, holds that the north side is the natural side 
for the CruciQxion, since the Jews regarded this as the unblessed and ill- 
omened quarter. 

^ Vie de Jesus; in the 16th edition he adds: "II eera loisible aussi 
de penser au monticule qui domine la ' Grotte de Jeremie.' '' 

•* E. D. Clarke, Travels, &c., vol. ii, pp. 552-565. Felix Fabri {circa 
A.D. 1483) mentions that in his day Saracens and Eastern Christians 
practised superstitious observances beneath a fig tree near the ancient 
Church of Sion, where there is a great heap of stones. To this spot Saracen 


and rejected the whole tradition. On his plan three crosses 
are shown outside the Sion Gate, and referenced, " Now called 
Mount Sion," perhaps the place of our Saviour's Crucifixion." 
The tomb of Joseph is assumed to be one of the sepulchres in 
the Valley of Hinnom on which the inscription " Of the holy 
Sion " appears. 

In 1841 the publication of Dr. Eobinson's Biblical Researches 
in Pakstinej which at once took its place as the standard work on 
the topography of the Holy Land, drew serious attention to the 
questions connected with the traditional tomb, especially in 
Great Britain and the United States. Dr. Eobinson rejected 
the accepted tradition, and his great reputation for accuracy of 
observation and extensive reading gave peculiar importance to 
his opinion. After a careful consideration of the whole question 
with the material then available, he came to the conclusion that 
from every point of view, topographical, historical, and tradi- 
tional, the decision must be that "Golgotha and the Tomb shown 
in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre are not upon the real places 
of the Crucifixion and Eesurrection." ^ Eobinson very wisely 
did not attempt to locate the " holy places." " If it be asked," 
he writes, " where then are the true sites of Golgotha and the 
Sepulchre to be sought? — I must reply that probably all search 
can only be in vain." 2 He does, however, suggest that it may 
have been on the road to Jaffa, or on that to Damascus. 

Eobinson's opinion that the traditional site of the Tomb was 
not authentic was accepted by many writers, who, less cautious 
than the learned American, asserted with confidence that they 

women came erery day, and burned incense on a stone, and buried loaves of 
bread, for they declared that the Sepulchre of Jesus was there, and not 
where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre stands. (The Wandering of 
Felix Fabri, vol. ii, p. 332 ; Palestine PH^rims* Texts, vol. viii.) 

^ Biblical Researches, 2nd ed., 1856, vol. i,.pp. 407-4-18. Robinson was 
answered, not very conclusively, by Newman, "Essay on the Miracles 
recorded in Ecclesiastical History," in Fleury's Ecclesiastical History, 
Oxon., 1842, and by Williams, Holy City, 1845. Much of Eobinson's 
topographical argument is now out of date from the discoveries made since 
he wrote. 

3 Biblical Researches, i, p. 418. 


had found the true sites of the Crucifixion and Eesurrection. One 
of the first to publish his views was Otto Thenius i (a.d. 1842), 
who identified "Jeremiah's Grotto," and the hill above it, some- 
times called "Skull Hill," with the Tomb of Christ and Golgotha. 
The hill is described as being rounded on the north, west, and 
east, but abrupt on the south, and as having the form of a skull 
— whence it might be called Golgotha. "The hill is outside and 
near the town ; near a road which must have existed in the time 
of Christ ; and it has in the very place (John xix, 41) a rock- 
hewn cavern which has an entrance such as the Holy Sepulchre 
must have had." Thenius believed that the tomb was inside 
"Jeremiah's Grotto," but had been quarried away, with the 
exception of the actual place upon which the body was laid, and 
that this was preserved in the " couch " of Jeremiah. The view 
of Thenius was adopted by Tristram ^ in 1858, and by Fiirrer in 
1865; but he afterwards changed his mind and advocated the 
claims of the traditional site.^ The knoll above "Jeremiah's 
Grotto" was also identified with Golgotha by Fisher Howe^ 
(a.d. 1871), whose description of the place may be quoted as 
representing the imaginative view of the present day : — 

" The hill is left steeply rounded od its west, north, and east sides, 
forming the back and sides of the kranion or skull.^ The skull-like 
front, or face, on the south side is formed by the deep perpendicular 
cutting and removal of the ledge. To the observer, at a distance, the 
eyeless socket of the skull would be suggested at once by the yawniug 
cavern, hewn within its face, beneath the hill." 

Fisher Howe maintains that the present city wall marks the 
course of the second wall of Josephus ; that previous to the con- 

^ " Golgotham et sanctum Sepulchrum," &c., in Zeitschrift fiir die 
SUtorUche Theologie^ vol. xii, pt. 4, pp. 1-34 (a.d. 1842). 

2 " Letter to the Times," in Quarterly Statement, 1893, p. 84. 

3 Wanderungen durch Faldstina (a.d. 1865); Art. "Golgotha" in 
Shenkel's Bibel LexiJcon. 

4 The True Site of Calvary, New York (a.d. 1871). 

^ Conder remarks {Quarterly Statement, 1881, p. 202), "It is the skull 
of an animal rather than of a human heing, and I should not 'like to base an 
argument on so slight a resemblance.'* He also calls {Quarterly Statement ^ 
1893, p. 71) the view that the hill with its caves resembles a skull with 
eje-sookets, " perhaps rather a fanciful idea." 

stniction of the seamd wall the eastern 
spur (Bezetha) was a continuoue ridge ; and 
that the wide open cutting Eouth of " Jere- 
miah's Grotto " (between A and B on 
plan, Fig. 6) was part of the general plan 
of fortification connected with that wall.' 
The same spot, considered permissible 
by Benan (see p. 106, note 3), was selected 
by Conder^ (a.d. 1878) on account of the 
suitability of its position, and, mainly, 
on the ground that it was pointed out by 
Jews at Jerusalem " by the name Beth 
ha-Sekelah, ' the Place of Stoning,' " 
and, "according to Jewish tradition," 
was "the ancient place of public execu- 
tion." Conder identifies the tomb of 
Joseph with a rock-hewn sepulchre (No. i 
on plan, Fig. 6), about 200 yards west of 
"Jeremiah's Grotto."* The view that 
Christ BuiFered on the hill above " Jere- 
miah's Grotto" was widely accepted in 
this country and in America when it 
became known that it had received the 
support of the late General Gordon* 


' The great width of the outtiiig aod its 
irregular fave on the north tide (a b c d e/ on 
plan, Fig. 6> ehow that it can only hsTo bean 
connected verj remotely, if Rt all, with the 
aacimt derrncea of the city. See Chap. XI. 

= Tt«t Wort i« PaUHine, i, 872-874 (1878) ; 
QuartBTly Sialement, 1881, pp. 200 tqq. ,- Fal4f 
tine Exploration Fvnd Mtmoirt, Jemwtem 
to)., pp. 429 aqq. (1384) ; Sandbook to ike Bi^U, 
pp. 355, 356 (1887). 

^:^Q,«arteTly Statement, 1831, pp. 203-206. 

< Geneial Oordon'a identification is part of 
hi« theory thnt the eastern spur or ridge of 
Uoriab reunibled a, human figure. Uie Tiews 
are fully stated in Appendix TIL 


(a.d. 1883-4). Since that date the identification has been 
adopted by Dr. Selah Merrill, U.S. Consul at Jerusalem i 
(a.d. 1885), Sir J. W. Dawson, late Director of the Canadian 
Geological Survey ^ (a.d. 1887), and many others; and it 
received wide currency from its publication in the Palestine 
volume of Mr. John Miuray's well-known series of handbooks. 
The hill above " Jeremiah's Grotto " is now frequently referred 
to as "the Protestant," "the English," or " Gordon's " Calvary, 
and the tomb, supposed to be that in which the Lord lay, 
is called "Gordon's Tomb of Christ," or "the Garden Tomb." 

Everyone who leaves Jerusalem by the Damascus Gate, and 
follows the road eastward to the Kidron valley, must pass 
between the low limestone cliffs, or scarps, and afterwards follow 
the line of the rock-hewn ditch which is in front of the north wall 
of the city (see Fig. 6). The distance between the two scarps 
at A and B is about 400 feet, and the altitude of the former 
is about 2,549 feet, and of the latter 2,529 feet above sea level. 

The width of the rock-hewn ditch D — D is from 50 to 75 
feet. In the face of the northern scarp is the mouth of the old 
quarry known as Jeremiah's Grotto, and above it is a Moham- 
medan cemetery. In the face of the southern scarp is the present 
entrance . to the extensive underground quarries called by 
Josephus the " Eoyal Caverns." Along the east of the scarp 
runs the north wall of Jerusalem, which is continued on the 
south side of the ditch D^ — D to the north-eastern angle of 
the city. The surface of the rock between the two scarps is 
concealed by rubbish, and, except at one or two points, its 
character is unknown. 

It will be noticed, on reference to the plan (Fig. 6), that whilst 
the southern scarp </, A, i is in direct continuation of the south side 

* " The Site of Calvary,** in Andover Meview, 1885. Dr. Merrill remarks 
that, in 1845, Dr. Eufus Anderson pointed out the hill as the site of the 
true Calvary. 

2 Egypt and Syria, pp. 107 sqq.^ 1887. The views of the knoll and the 
caves (pp. 105, 106) are rough, inaccurate, and misleading. Sir J. W. Dawson 
visited Palestine in 1883-~4. See also Bider Haggard, A Winter Pilgrimage 
in 1900 5 and Sir W. Charley, The Holy City, Athens, and Egypt, 1902. 


of the ditch D — D, and marks, in fact the original prolongation 
of that ditch, the northern scarp a, b, c, d, e, f runs in an 
irregular line, and can only have been connected very remotely, 
if at all, with the ancient defences of the city. The remarkable 
excavation between the two scarps has made the knoll above 
Jeremiah's Grotto (sometimes called " Skull Hill ") a prominent 
feature in the landscape from some points of view, and has given 
it an appearance of isolation and altitude that it did not 
originally possess. It is therefore important to determine the 
date and nature of the great rock-cutting, and the period at which 
the knoll assumed its present aspect. The data for the solution 
of this question are unfortunately few, but they are not without 
a certain significance. In the short topographical description of 
Jerusalem (Chap. III.) allusion was made to the Eastern hill upon 
which the Temple was built, and to its flanking valleys, the 
Tyropoeon valley on the west, and the St. Anne's ravine and 
Kidron valley on the east (see Plan of Jerusalem). It is across 
this spur between the Tyropceon and St. Anne's ravines that the 
rock has been excavated. South of the Temple precincts the 
Eastern hill was thickly covered with houses, but north of the 
Temple there was, during the reign of Herod the Great, nothing 
except perhaps some few suburban villas beyond the Castle of 
Antonia. This latter was separated from that portion of the 
spur called Bezetha by a deep ditch. Under the Eoman 
governors who ruled Jerusalem after the deposition of Archilaus, 
houses were built on and around Bezetha, and the suburb had 
become so large and populous by a.d. 41, when Agrippa became 
king, that it was deemed necessary to protect it by a wall, called 
the " third wall " by Josephus.^ 

The ditch between the fortress of Antonia and Bezetha is 
represented, in part at least, by the rock scarps north and south 
of the street which passes beneath the Ecce Homo arch.^ The 

1 TFarJt, t, 4, § 2, 

^ The scarps are yisible in the Church of the Sisters of Sion, and in the 
Souterrains of the Convent of the same order {Quarterly Statement y 1872, 
pp. 47-51 ; Palestine JUxploration Fund Memoirs^ Jerusalem yolume, pp. 
202t212, 304-5 ; Ghinneau, Archaeological Researches, toI. i, pp. 50-60. 


wall of Agrippa is described by Josephus^ as running through, or 
across the Eoyal Caves, and is generally supposed to have crossed 
the spur at the point B (see Fig. 6), and to have been, here at 
least, identical in trace with the modern walL^ 

Between the ditch of the Antonia and the north wall of 
Jerusalem there are the remains of a rock-hewn conduit C E (see 
Fig. 6), which, at an early period, probably that of the Jewish 
monarchy, carried water from an unknown source north of 
the city along the west side of the eastern hill. This conduit, 
which was capable of supplying water to the Temple area and the 
lower portions of Mount Moriah, was cut in two when the ditch 
of the Antonia was excavated, and its continuity was again 
broken by the great wall of the enclosure of Herod's Temple, 
which seems to have been built across it. There is some reason 
to suppose that the conduit carried water as far south as the ditch 
of the Antonia after the completion of that fortress.^ But its 
utility in this respect apparently ceased when the ditch of Agrippa's 
wall was excavated.* This would seem to indicate that, at C at 
least, there was no open cutting some ten or eleven years after 
the crucifixion, when Agrippa built his wall (a.d. 41-44). Near 
C the ditch of this wall appears to have been cut down almost to 
the level of the Damascus Gate, but in front of the underground 
quarry which stretches southward beneath the city from B it is 
unfortunately concealed by rubbish. The ditch was probably 

1 TFarSy v, 4, § 2. 

^ The history of Jerusalem during the period B.C. 4 to a.d. 42 does not 
fieem to me to support the view that the extension of the town beyond the 
second wall had been so great as to require the enclosure of the large 
additional area between the second and third walls shown on the plans of 
Itobinson and Fergusson, or even as suggested as possible by Warren and 

^ This seems to follow from the character of the excavations in the 
ditch, tlie twin pools, and the deepening of the southern part of the conduit. 
The unknown source was perhaps a pool near the head of the Tyropoeon 
ravine. For a description of the conduit and its relation to the ditches, see 
Quarterly Statement, 1872, pp. 46-51. 

* The conduit is distinctly seen in the south scarp of the ditch at C, but 
the rock of the north scarp having been cut away below the level of the 
conduit, its further course in that direction cannot be traced. 



excavated before there was any open cutting between A and B, 
but there is no direct evidence on this point. Originally the 
crest was- undoubtedly continuous from A to B (see Fig. 6). 
Sir C. Warren shows a steady fall of 20 feet from north to south,^ 
while Dr. Schick believed that A and B were two knolls with a 
dip between them. Both forms are possible, but that adopted by 
Warren appears more probable. The sections exposed at A and 
B show clearly the manner in which the thin beds of extremely 
hard limestone, misse overlie the thick stratum of imlike.^ 
The latter, an easily worked stone, which hardens on exposure to 
the air, has always been nruch used for building purposes. If we 
may judge from the undergroiuid quarry below B, which was 
almost certainly in use in the time of the Jewish monarchy,^ the 
melike was worked like a seam of coal, and the stones were dressed 
under cover in the quarry. 

The information at present available with regard to the 
quarries and excavations is not sufficient to justify a positive 
statement, but the following view is suggested as probable. 

Until the reign of Herod building material was obtained from 
the lower melike bed without disturbing the harder strata above, 
which thus formed a natural roof to the quarries. Herod con- 
tinued the system of quarrying and dressing the stone imder 
cover, but may have cut away some of the upper strata on the 
east and west sides of the spur to obtain easier access to the 
melike. Agrippa (a.d. 41-44) in excavating the ditch of his wall 
broke through the roof of the quarries, and then, as the ground 
rose in front of the wall, he cut away the misse beds to the north 
to prevent the close approach of an enemy. The material thus 
obtained was used in the construction of his wall, and at the 
same time the front of the southern portion of the quarry, now 
known as the Royal Quarries, was closed up. The open cutting 
thus formed was probably widened when Hadrian rebuilt the 
walls, and further increased during the Byzantine period. The 

^ Palestine Exploration Fund Memoirs^ Jerusalem volume, Plate XII. 

* Quarterly Statement, 1902, p. 284. 

^ Gtmneau, Archaeological Researches, toL 1, pp. 241-46. 


quarries were used later by the Crusaders, and the floor was 
certainly deepened on the west side when the Asnerie was built. 

If this view is correct, the crest of the spur was continuous at 
the time of the crucifixion, and the knoll above Jeremiah's Grotto 
could not then have had its present isolated appearance. It is 
improbable that the open cutting, as we now see it, was earlier 
than the time of the Crusaders, and it may possibly be later. 

No tradition of any kind connects " Skull Hill " or the tomb 
near it with the Crucifixion or the Resurrection. But the site 
is one that appeals directly to the eyes of those who from infancy 
have heard Calvary called a "mount," and to the minds of those 
to whom tradition is distasteful, especially when it relates to a 
scriptural site. The arguments urged in favour of the spot may 
be stated thus: — (1) Its elevation and conspicuous position; 
(2) its resemblance to a human skull ; (3) its proximity to the 
city and to the great road to the north ; (4) the Jewish tradition 
which identifies it with the "Place of Stoning"; (5) the tradition 
relating to the martyrdom of Stephen ; and (6) the existence of 
tombs in the vicinity — one of which is described "as recalling 
very nearly the probable appearance of the new tomb of 
Joseph." 1 

(1) It has already been pointed out (see p. 12) that there is 
no indication in the Bible that Golgotha was skull-like in form, 
or that Christ was crucified on a hill; that, near Jerusalem, 
elevation is not necessary for visibility; that no Greek writer 
uses the expression "mount" in connection with the spot; and 
that the skull-like appearance and elevation of Golgotha are 
apparently fancies introduced from the West. 

(2) Eesemblance to a skull can hardly be regarded as a 
serious argument, for it involves the assumption that the 
appearance of the hill, and of "an artificial cliff produced by 

^ Dr. Sanday writes that he cannot " regard the urguments adduced in 
favour of the new site as having really any great weight. They are mere 
possibilities of coincidence of a yagne and shadowy kind ; and tliey are 
unsupported by even a particle of direct evidence." {Sacred Sites of the 
Go*pel9, p. 71.) 

H 2 


ancient quarrying," ^ has not altered during the last 1,870 years. 
"In any case," as Dr. Sanday justly observes,^ **it must be 
extremely doubtful whether an appearance of this kind at the 
present day would have been equally marked some nineteen 
centuries ago." I have given reasons for believing that, at 
the time of the Crucifixion, the eastern spur was a continuous 
ridge; that the quarries were then worked imderground; that 
the wide open cutting south of "Jeremiah's Grotto" (between 
A and B, see Fig. 6) had its origin in the ditch of Agrippa's wall, 
and did not assume its present form and dimensions until the 
fifth century, when the great church of St. Stephen was built; 
that after the erection of the church portions of the quarry were 
used as a cemetery ; and that some of the excavation is as late 
as the time of the Crusades. In the first century the eastern 
spur was at this point a rocky ridge of some width (see 
PL VIII.,3) covered with stony detritus which is still visible, and 
its essential features appear to have remained unchanged until the 
period of the Crusades. Daniel* (a.d. 1106-7) calls it "a flat, 
rocky mountain." The knoll, which is supposed to give a skull-like 
form to the hill, is due to the ruined tombs and accumulations ^ 
of a Moslem cemetery which dates from the fourteenth or 
fifteenth century. The view that any portion of the very hard 
limestone beds above " Jeremiah's Grotto " could have been worn 
into a rounded or skull-like form by the action of wind and 
weather is imtenable. 

(3) In considering proximity to the city and the road, it 
must be remembered that the second wall of Josephus was 
probably some distance south of the present wall, and that it is 
by no means certain that the road from the Damascus Gate 
marks the line of the road to the north in the time of Christ. 
It is possible that the road then followed the easier slope up the 

^ Dawson, Bgypt and Si/ria, p. 107. 
2 Sacred Sites of the Gospels^ p. 70. 

^ Reduced from the Ordnance Suryej photograph taken in 1865. 
* Abbot Daniel, ch. ix, Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. iv. 
'^ Macalister gives the depth of soil as 10 feet (Quarterlt^ Statement^ 
1902, p. 129). 


Tyropoeon Valley,^ and ran north-west until it met the road 
from the Upper City, The existing road between the " Tombs 
of the Kings " and the Damascus Gate, possibly following an 
earlier footpath, may only date from the reign of Hadrian. In 
any case the distance from " Skull Hill " to that road is greater 
than would be customary in the case of a Eoman crucifixion. 

(4) There is no evidence that there was a special Jewish 
place of execution at Jerusalem in the first century, and the 
existing local tradition which connects "Jeremiah's Grotto" 
with the " Place of Stoning " is unreliable (see p. 20). 

(5) The tradition that St. Stephen suffered martyrdom out- 
side the Damascus Gate may have been based on an earlier one 
that he was stoned outside the north gate of the city, which 
would be that of the second wall. There is no evidence that he 
was put to death at a place of public execution. 

(6) The rock-hewn tomb supposed to be that of Joseph of 
Arimathea, and called "Gordon's Tomb of Christ" or "the 
Garden Tomb," is one of the most insignificant in the great 
necropolis which surrounds Jerusalem, and does not resemble 
the class of sepulchre which a man of Joseph's rank and position 
is likely to have had hewn out for himself. Unlike the Jewish 
tombs near the city, it is cut in the cliff of a disused quarry, and 
not in the scarped face of one of the beds of limestone.^ Some 
of the details in the tomb^ are certainly Christian, and there 
seems every reason to suppose that it belongs to the great 
cemetery north of the city, of which a portion north of the 
tomb is owned by the Dominicans, and south of it by the 
Germans.* The extensive cemetery, partly in the quarry and 
partly beyond it, dates from the erection of the church over the 

'^ 3ee plan of Jerusalem. 

2 -See vie.w, Quarterly Statement^ 1903, p. 85. 

^ The onlj accurate plan and description of tliis tomb are those by 
Dr. Schick (Quarterltt Statement^ 1892, pp. 121 sqq.), A Christian Qrigii|i 
is ascribed to the tomb by Selah Merrilli and by Conder {Quarterly State- 
mewt, 1892, p. 205). 

^ The coins found in the graves in the G-erman property range from 
A.D. 518 onwards {Quarterly Statement, 1902, pp. 403, sqq.). 


reputed tomb of the first martyr. During the Byzantine period 
the rock level was probably that of the sill of the door of the 
tomb, but it was cut down to make room for the Asnerie of the 
Crusaders. The tomb which Conder suggests may have been 
that of Joseph (No. 4 on plan, Fig. 6) is certainly Jewish ; but its 
distance from the assiuned site of Calvary on the knoll, 600 feet, 
is greater than the narrative of John xix, 17, seems to indicate. 

Fergusson^ (a.d. 1847), maintained, chiefly upon architectural 
grounds, that the " Dome of the Eock," in the Har4m esh-Sherlf , 
was the Church of the Eesurrection erected by Constantino over 
the reputed Tomb of Christ. The Tomb he identified with the 
cave beneath the Sakhra, and Golgotha was placed near the 
Golden Gate. Fergusson urged that the Crucifixion must have 
taken place near the Temple, which he located in the south-west 
angle of the Har4m esh-Sherif, since the priests could not other- 
wise have looked on without incurring risk of ceremonial defile- 
ment. The theory, which attracted much attention at the time, 
was adopted by Langlois ^ (a.d. 1861), Unger ^ (a.d. 1863), and a 
few other writers; but the discovery of the Madeba mosaic, 
which represents the Church of Constantine on the site now 
occupied by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, has shown that 
Mr. Fergusson was entirely mistaken in his views. 

Munk * (a.d. 1856) considered that it was difficult to draw the 
second wall so as to exclude the traditional sites, and that the 
tradition relating to the discovery of the Tomb was not beyond 
criticism. He was of opinion that Golgotha might very well 
have been on Bezetha, which was, in the time of Christ, outside 
the walls. 

Dr. Barclay 5 (a.d. 1857) believed that the accepted tradition 

^ Essay on the Ancient Topography of Jerusalem (a.d. 1847) : Art. 
" Jerusalem/' Part III., in ^mith'% Dictionary of the Bible (a.d. 1863) j The 
Holy Sepulchre and. the Temple (a.d. 1865) ; The Temples of the Jews 
(a.d. 1878). 

^ Un chapitre inSdit de la question des Lieux-Saints, A.D. 1861. 

^ Die jBauten Konstantin^s der Grossen am heUigen Grabet A.D. 1863. 

** " Palestine," in V Univers Pittoresque, A.D. 1856. 

* The City of the Great King (a.d. 1857). 


was unsound ; that no engineer could have located the seamd wall 
of Josephus so as to exclude ^he Church of the Holy Sepulchre, 
and that Golgotha must have been near the Temple, since the 
priests who derided Christ would not have left the precincts on 
that **high day." He places Calvary on the spur between 
St. Anne's Eavine and the Kidron Valley, outside the present 
walls, and east of the Church of St. Anne. He supposes that 
there was, originally, a monticule, or rock, at this place, which 
was destroyed afterwards by Jews or Pagans, 

The late Bishop Gobat of Jerusalem (a.d. 1864-5) held that 
Christ, the Antitype, must have suffered north of the altar, and 
placed Golgotha and the Tomb on the same spur as Barclay, but 
north of the present wall, and due north of the altar, near the 
contour 2504 (see plan of Jerusalem). I at one time^ adopted 
Dr. Gobat's view, under the impression that the hill of Bezetha 
was covered with houses at the time of the Crucifixion ; but a 
reconsideration of the history of Jerusalem during the first forty 
years of the first century has led me to modify my opinion with 
reference to the occupation of Bezetha, and possibility of its 
having been the scene of the Passion. Canon Gill ^ suggests the 
" Tombs of the Kings " as possibly the sepulchre in which the 
body of Christ was laid, but the distance from the city and the 
character of the Tomb seem opposed to this theory. 

The Kev. S. Manning ^ and Dr. Hutchinson * place Golgotha 
and the Tomb on the slope of Olivet — the latter in the traditional 
Garden of Gethsemane. 

Keim ^ (a.d. 1883) considers that a spot near the castle garrison 
would have been selected for safety's sake, and places Golgotha 
near the Jaffa Gate. Clos* (a.d. 1898) adopts the traditional 
Golgotha, but places the Tomb some 200 yards to the south 
of it. 

^ Smith's Dictionary of the Bible ; Art. " Jerusaleiu/* i, 
^ Quarterly Statement^ 1901, pp. 299 sqq. 
3 Tftose Holy Fields, p. 107. 

* Quarterly Statement, 1870, 1873, 1893. 

* The History of Jesus of Nazara, v, p. 134. 

* Kreuz und Grab Jesu, 1898. 


The general opinion which I have formed with regard to the 
(iraditional sites may be thus stated: — There is no decisive 
reiason, historical, traditional, or topographical, for placing 
Grolgotha and the Tomb where they are now shown. At the 
same time, there is no direct evidence that they were not so 
situated. No objection urged against the sites is of such a 
convincing nature that it need disturb the minds of those who 
accept,^ in all good faith, the authenticity of places which are 
hallowed by the prayers of countless pilgrims since the days of 

As regards the true sites, I agree with Eobinson that 
"probably all search for them will be in vain." If there be 
anything in the idea of type and antitype, and there possibly 
may be, then Christ must have suffered north of the altar, 
possibly on the eastern slope of that portion of Mount Moriah 
knowi^ as Bezetha, and perhaps close to the road which led 
northwards from the Antonia and the Temple precincts. If, 
on the other hand, there is nothing in the idea of type and 
antitype, then, always supposing that the Church of the Holy 
Sepulchre is eventually proved to have been outside the secovd 
wall, I should be inclined to give more weight to the identifica- 
tion of Macarius and his coadjutors in A.D. 326 than to the 
guesses or arguments of writers in the nineteenth and twentieth 



The Ancient Walls of Jerusalem. 

1. General Remarks; 2. Tlie City Walls in A.D. 70; 3. Tlie 
Walls of the Roman Camp, a.d. 70-132 ; 4. Tlie Walls of 
jElia Capitolina, 

1. General Remarks. — Before attempting to investigate the 
questions connected with the ancient walls of Jerusalem, some 
consideration of the general principles that governed the con- 
struction of fortifications in early times is not only desirable, but 
necessary. Jerusalem was strongly fortified at all periods of its 
history, but there is no reason to suppose that there was 
anything unusual in the trace and construction of its walls. 
The defences of Jebus could not have differed greatly from 
those of other Canaanite cities; the walls of David and his 
successors, which Nehemiah restored, were constructed probably 
in accordance with Phoenician systems of fortification ; and the 
citadels and walls built by Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa 
were almost certainly Greek or Greco-Eoman in character. 

Philo of Byzantium,^ who embodies the experience of his day, 
lays down that the trace of a wall, and the form, size and 
position of its towers, must depend upon the natural features of 
the ground. The salient angles should not be too advanced, for 
such saUents are more useful to the besiegers than to the 
besieged ; and the towers should be so situated as to give each 
other mutual support. In the construction of fortifications every 
effort was made to guard against the blows of the battering ram 

^ Circa B.C. 150. Traite de Fortificationj par Fhilon de Byzance, traduit 
par M. A. de Bochas d'Aiglun (in Soci^t^ d'Kmulation du Doubs, " M^m. 
S^r.," vol. Ti, BesanQon). See also Yitruvius {circa B.C. 28), i, 5; and 
Tegetius (end of fourth century a.d.), Les Institutions Militairesm 


and the insidious attacks of the miner, for these were considered 
far more dangerous than the projectiles of an enemy. Thus on 
steep rocky slopes the foot of the wall was rendered inaccessible 
or difficult of approach by scarping the rock beneath it ; whilst 
on level or undulating ground it was protected by a deep ditch. 
The range of ancient projectiles was small, and a wall of sufficient 
height and medium thickness,^ even when the ground rose 
upwards at a moderate slope from its foot, was ample protection 
against them. On Jhe other hand, the blows of the ram and the 
pick of the miner could only be resisted by solid well-built 
masonry. The walls exposed to their attack were consequently 
of great strength and thickness. Their lower portions and those 
of their flanking towers were frequently solid masses of masonry,? 
and their bases were sometimes protected by masonry revetments 
built at the angle of slope best calculated to resist the ram and 
projectiles, and to render escalade difficult.^ Ai\niere the walls 
and towers were exposed to the attack of an enemy, the masonry 
was faced wholly or partially with large stones having projecting 
bosses, to counteract as far as possible the shattering effects of 
concussion 3 where they were not exposed to attack, as on the 
side facing the town, the masonry was of plain-dressed stones 
having no bosses. In places difficult of access the walls and 
towers were weaker, but of similar construction. It may be 
inferred then, that the towers of an ancient wall were at 
irregular intervals, and differed in form and size ; and that 
when a wall did not stand above a scarp, it was of great thick- 
ness, and was protected by a ditch. On weak fronts, especially 
in advance of gateways, there were frequently entrenchments 
composed of ditches and palisades, and there is some evidence in 
Josephus that there were such entrenchments at Jerusalem. 

The description which Josephus gives of the siege in a.d. 70^ 
and existing remains, show that the fortifications of Jerusalem 

^ Tacitus, History v, 11, gives the height of the towers at Jerusalem as 
60 feet when built above a scarp, and 120 feet when standing on the lower 

2 Josephus, Wars, v, 4, §§ 2, 3. ^ j^ars, v, 4, § 4; 5, § 8. 


were at that time of exceptional strength, and that they had been 
planned and constructed with great skill.^ The Jebusite walls 
had no doubt disappeared, but the first and second walls, though 
frequently damaged and repaired, must have retained much of 
their original character. The ancient scarps above which the 
first wall stood and fragments of the masonry are still visible on 
the west and south fronts; but on the north it is uncertain 
whether the wall ran above a scarp or behind a ditch. The 
secmid wall, built on undulating ground to the north of the first 
wall, must have been of great thickness, and must have been 
protected by a rock-hewn ditch. The third wall was, probably, 
not unlike the walls of some of the Greek towns in Asia Minor, 
and its northern front at least must have been protected by a 
rock-hewn ditch. In those portions of the modern defences that 
undoubtedly belong to the Herodian period, Greek influence is 
very apparent. The " Tower of David " is in all its features a 
tower such as Philo describes, and the beautifully-dressed and 
jointed stones of its sloping revetment are essentially Greek in 

It was believed at one time that any fragment of masonry at 
Jerusalem could be dated, approximately, by the manner in 
which the stones were dressed.^ But Mr. Dickie, a trained 
architect, who was associated with Dr. Bliss in the excavations at 
Jerusalem in 1894-97, came, after a study of all the masonry 
exposed, to a different conclusion. After pointing out that the 
modem stone dresser uses the same tools that his predecessor did 
when the ancient walls were built, he remarks that his investiga- 
tion "tends to encourage scepticism as to the possibility of 
fixing periods by any hard and fast rules of masonry alone. 

^ Cf, Tacitus, History^ v, 11. Two hills of considerable height were 
enclosed bj walls scientifically constructed with re-entering angles and 
curves to take an assailant in flank. 

^ There was a general impression that most of the stones with a marginal 
draft were Jewish. This .view has long been recognised as an error^ due to 
insufficient archseological knowledge, and it appears to have owed its wide 
.dissemination to Porter, who wrote, in* Murray's Handbook to Syria and 
Falettiine, of the ** Jewish bevelling." 


Each succeeding style has mingled with its predecessor from 
the time of its production. Boss and margin work may have 
been used in early Jewish times, but was undoubtedly used in 
later Jewish-Roman times, and afterwards. Comb-pick margin 
with pick-centered dressing was certainly used contemporarily 
with the boss and margin, and may have been used before ► 
Quarry-pick dressing is universal. The dehcate pick-centre and 
comb-pick margined dressing of the Haram Area is certainly 
characteristic of one great building period such as the reign of 
Herod the Great might signify." ^ 

Boss ^nd margin work is simply a natural development io 
stone dressing.2 It is found in the Hittite walls at Boghaz Keuiy 
in the walls of Phoenician cities in Syria and Palestine, of the 
eighth century city at Lachish, and of Greek Asia Minor ;; 
it is seen also in Eoman and Byzantine buildings, and in castles 
erected during the period of the Crusades. The highly-finished 
masonry of the Wailing Place, and of the sloping revetment of 
" David's Tower," might be a copy of that of the podiwn of the 
temple of Diana at Ephesus,^ or of that of the temple of Jupiter 
at Athens, so close is the resemblance. 

2. The City Walls A.D. 70. — At the time of the capture of 
Jerusalem by Titus, the city was protected on the north side by 
three walls, and for the trace of these fortifications the only 
authority is Josephus. In his general description of the defences* 
the Jewish historian follows the historical order of the walls •.. 
The first is the old, or inner wall, the second, the intermediate one,, 
and the third, the new or outer wall by Agrippa. But, in 
recording the incidents of the siege, he refers to the walls- 
occasionally in terms that would naturally be used by a Eoman 
officer outside the city. From this point of view the outer line 

^ Excavations at Jerusalem^ 1894-97, p. 282. 

'^ As soon as walls were built with closely bedded and jointed stones, some 
dressing of the margins became necessary. The faces of the stones were left 
rough or finely dressed, according to taste and the character of the wall. 

^ In the British Museum there is the face of a stone from the Temple- 
burned B.C. 856, which is almost identical with the best work in the Wailing; 
Place. * W^ar», V, 4, §§ 2-4, 

of defence becomes tihe first wall,^ the intermediate line the second, 
and the earliest or inner line of defence becomes tbe third wall.^ 

In the following remarks the walls are referred to in their 
historical order : — 

According to JoaephuB," the total circmt of the walla was 


33 stadia, or 19,800 feet. The third wall had 90 towers, the second 
14, and the first 60. The towers were 30 feet square, and the 
curtain walls between them were 300 feet long. How far these 
numbers are correct it is impossible to say. In the case of the 
curtain walls they are certainly wrong, and in that of the circuit 
of the walls they are apparently incorrect. 

In another passage^ the length of the wall of circumvallation 
thrown up by the Eomans, which would be well known at the 
time from the measurements of the Eoman engineers, is stated by 
Josephus to have been 39 stadia, i.e., 23,400 feet. If this is 
correct, the circuit of the walls must have been less than 33 stadia, 
even when the fact that the wall of circumvallation ran between 
the second and third wall is taken into consideration. 

The length given to the curtain walls between the towers, 
300 feet, is greater than is known in any ancient fortifications, 
and would make the third wall more than the total circuit. It 
has been suggested that the original reading was 70 cubits or 
105 feet ;2 but, even with curtain walls of that length, the third 
wall would be as much as 20 J stadia, or 12,150 feet. A 
comparison with the curtain walls of other ancient fortifications 
would seem to indicate that the average length of those of the 
Jerusalem defences could not have been more than 150 feet, and 
that it was probably much less in the old walls. There are 
other diflSculties connected with the statements of Josephus 
which need not be discussed, such as the fact that on the east 
wall of the Haram enclosure there were, as far as is known, only 
three towers in a distance of 1,500 feet, .and the question whether 
the gate towers and the great towers of Herod's palace are 
included in the numbers. 

First Wall. 

The first or old wall was difficult to capture on account of the 
ravines beneath it and the height upon which it was built. 

1 Wars, V, 12, § 2. 

^ The error is supposed to be due to some copjist Laving used the Qreek 
sign (/ for 200, instead of o' for 70 cubits. 


" Commencing on the north side at the tower called Hippicus, 
and extending to the Xystus, and then joining the Council 
House, it ended at the western portion of the Temple."^ South- 
ward from Hippicus it followed approximately the line of the 
present west wall of the city until it reached the site now 
occupied by the British cemetery, whence it was traced by 
Dr. Bliss to Siloam.^ (See General Plan of Jerusalem.) The 
wall was defended by 60 towers, amongst which, or perhaps 
additional to them, were the three great towers Hippicus, 
Phaseelus and Mariamne, built by Herod the Great, and forming, 
with his walled palace, the citadel of the " Upper City." 

The site of Herod's palace is now occupied by the citadel 
south of the Jaffa Gate, and the tower Phaseelus may safely be 
identified with the existing " Tower of David." The position of 
Hippicus is unknown, but it is probably represented by the tower 
adjoining the Jaffa Gate. From the citadel eastward the wall 
followed the right bank of the "Palace Eavine" (see Plan of 
Jerusalem) to some point at or near Wilson's Arch. The exact 
trace is unknown, but there is reason to believe that it stood 
above a rock-scarp and was, in part at least, protected by a ditch. 
A massive wall of large stones with two towers standing sixty 
feet apart (S. on plan p. 131), which may have formed part of the 
first wall, was discovered in 1861, but there is no accurate 
description of it available.^ 

Second Wall. 

"The second wall started from a gate called Genath (or 
* Gennath '), which belonged to the first wall, and, enclosing only 
the northern quarter,^ went up to the Antonia." ^ The wall was 

1 Wars, V, 4, § 2. 

^ Bliss, "Excavations at Jerusalem, As this section of the wall has no 
bearing on the question of the site of Golgotha, all details regarding it are 
omitted, and the line of wall is not shown in Fig. 8. 

3 See Quarterly Statement, 1886, p. 207. 

* Lit.y " encompassing the quarter to the north alone." This quarter 
appears to be the suburb (irpodirTeiov) of Tfars, i, 13, § 3, where some texts 
read vpotrdpicrtoVf and of Ant,y xir, 13, § 4 ; xv, 11, § 5. 

^ Warsy V, 4, § 2. 


defended by 14 towers, and was not connected, at any point, 
with the third wall.^ It was intended to protect the quarter to 
the north of the citadel. Immediately north of Herod's 
fortified palace few houses had been built, and here the space 
between the secovd and third walls was occupied, for the most 
part, by terraced gardens, in which probably there were rock- 
hewn tombs. 

It is now generally agreed that the Antonia, the acropolis of 
the Eastern Hill, was situated at the north-west corner of the 
Hardm esh-Shertf, and portions of the ditch running, approxi* 
mately, east and west, that separated it from Bezetha^ have been 
discovered. The expression " went up to the Antonia " shows 
that the wall ran straight up from the Tyropoeon Valley along 
the south side of the ditch, and that it did not, as some writers 
have supposed,^ either take a wide sweep to the north, or follow, 
in part, the course of the present wall, and then come down over 
the ridge of Bezetha to the acropolis. 

The position of the Gate Genath, which may have derived its 
name from the gardens that were enclosed between the second and 
third walls, is unknown. The interval between the Tower 
Hippicus and the gate must have been considerable. Before 
•commencing the siege Titus made a reconnaissance, and decided 
to take the Temple by way of Antonia, and to make his attack 
upon the " Upper City " by the monument or tomb of the high 
priest John.* The latter point was selected because, in that 
quarter, the third wall was lower than elsewhere, and the absence 
of any line of defence between the second and third walls exposed 
the ^rs^ wall to direct attack as soon as the outer wall had fallen.^ 
An additional reason was that the space between the second and 
third walls was unencumbered by houses, and the approach to 
the first wall through the gardens was easy. 

1 Cf, Wars, ii, 19, § 4. « jfr^rs, v, 4, § 2 ; 5, § 8. 

3 Robinson, Tobler, &c. * Wars, v, 6, § 2. 

t^ Joseplius seems to bint tbat it was originally intended to build a wall 
which would connect the second and third walls, and protect this weak 
|X>int, but the intention was never carried out. 


It would appear from the above that the monument of John 
was situated between the second and third walls. And, since the 
citadel is not mentioned, there must have been an appreciable 
distance between the monument and the almost impregnable 
towers Phasselus, Hippicus, and Mariamne. Titus would not 
have attacked these towers and the fortified palace. Evidently 
his intention was to isolate them ^ by breaking into the " Upper 
City " through the weaker wall to the east. The tomb of John 
was certainly post-Exilic, and consequently must have been 
outside the second wall. It was in close proximity to the first 
wall,2 and 45 feet from the mound thrown up by the 10th Legion 
at the Pool Amygdalon, which is usually identified with 
** Hezekiah's Pool." This pool, like the monument of John,^ 
was outside the second wall.^ It is certainly an ancient pool, and 
there must have been some reason, such as the prior existence 
of a massive wall, for its construction on the side of a hill. In 
two instances — the Birket Isfi-ail and the Lower Pool of Siloam — 
the dams of the pools formed part of the defences of the city at 
certain periods of its history ; and it is natural to suppose that 
the eastern wall of Hezekiah's Pool was similarly connected with 
the fortifications of Jerusalem. It is true that the pool would 
have been, in this case, outside the wall, but, as the water could 
easily be run off to reservoirs at a lower level, this was of no 
importance. The surface of Christian Street is here many feet 
a-bove the rock, and the houses on the west side of the street are 
built on solid masonry,^ which originally may have formed part 
of a city wall. Taking into consideration the space required for 
the mounds thrown up against the first wall, and the distance 
necessary to secure the besiegers from missiles and hostile attacks 

^ This lie erentually did, but at another spot (Wars, vi, 8, §§ 1-4). 

2 TTar*, V, 9, § 2 J 11, § 4. 

3 The monument was either the sculptured face of the rock-hewn tomb, 
•or a pyramid or stele abore it. 

'* The south portion of the wall was standing and its towers occupied by 
the Bomans when the two mounds were thrown up (Wars, v, 8, § 2), and 
ihese mounds would not have been erected on opposite sides of the wall. 

« Quarterly Statement, 1891, pp. 277, 278 j 1899, p. 44 and plate. 



from the citadel, it is hardly possible to place the second wall 
nearer the " Tower of David " than the east side of " Hezekiah's 
Pool,"^ a distance of about 250 feet. On the other hand, if 
it were placed still farther east it would be in too close proximity 
to the main thoroughfare of the ancient city. 

The quarters of Titus, on ground known as " the Camp of the 
Assyrians," was beyond the range of missiles from the seamd 
wall.2 The exact position of " the Camp of the Assyrians " is 
not known, but the tent of Titus would naturally be pitched on 
the back of the western spur of the plateau in close proximity to 
the tower Psephinus which had fallen into his hands, and whence 
the whole field of operations could be overlooked. The first camp 
of Titus was 400 yards from Psephinus, and the camp of one of 
the legions was the same distance from Hippicus.^ These camps 
would be well out of range of any engines likely to be available 
inside Jerusalem, and it may reasonably be supposed that the 
second camp of Titus, on the high ground, would be out of 
effective range of missiles from the second wall at about 250 
or 300 yards. 

The second wall must have been protected by a rock-hewn 
ditch, and its lower half must have been a solid mass of masonry 
from 15 to 20 feet thick. The stones were probably of great 
size, and those on the outer face of the wall would have marginal 
drafts and rough projecting bosses. 

All the principal authorities are now agreed that at its eastern 
extremity the wall ran along the south side of the ditch of the 
Antonia; but there is no such agreement with regard to the 
position of the Gate Genath at its western end. On this point 
three different views have been put forward, and each of these 
has been supported by arguments drawn from the existence of 
isolated masses of masonry. The first theory is based upon a 
fragment of an old city wall (A, see Fig. 9), which extends for a 
distance of 120 feet from the front of the Grand New Hotel, north 

^ Quarterly Statement, 1899, p. 44 ; see section of wall and pool. 
2 Wars, V, 7, § 3. 
» Wars, V, 3, § 5. 

of the citadel, to the corner of the street Haret eJrMaw&zin. 
Several writers consider this fragment to be a portion of the 

1. Tower of David (PIibsbbIiib). 

2. Hippicns. 

8. Grand Kew Hotel. 
4. MediteTTanean Hotel. 

6. Church of St. Joho. 

S. Fraacisfan ConTent. 
7. OhuFch of the Redeemer. 
H. Russian Convent, 
J. Porta Judiciaria. 


second wall ; and place the Gate Genath either in the " Tower of 
David," or in the curtain wall connecting it with the tower by 
the Jaffa Gate. The wall is well situated for defence, but the 
descriptions given by Josephus of the project of attack framed by 
Titus, and of the operations of the siege, render its identification 
with the second wall of the city impossible. The position assigned 
to the Gate Genath is also an improbable one. The fragment, 
which has no ditch in front of it, and apparently no towers, is 
probably a portion of the wall which Hadrian built round the 
civil town or colony of ^lia. The number of relics of the 10th 
Legion, Fretensis, found near the rock during the excavations,^ 
combined with the absence of pre-Koman objects, seems to 
indicate that the ground was not occupied prior to the siege by 
Titus. It may also be observed that the Roman engineers, when 
constructing the legionary fortress after the siege would, almost 
certainly, have demolished completely all walls within 300 feet 
of their fortifications. The fragment, apparently, is referred to 
Hadrian by Saewulf , who saw Jerusalem before its reconstruction 
during the period of the Latin Kingdom. 

Writers who reject the authenticity of Golgotha maintain that 
from the north end of fragment A, the second wall either ran in a 
north-westerly direction to the ruins of walls in the garden of the 
Latin Patriarch (B), and at Kasr eIrJalM (C) ; ^ (see Fig. 8) or 
that it continued northward towards the Franciscan Convent (see 
Fig. 9) ; and that then, in either case, it followed the present city 
wall to the Damascus Gate. This line seems to take too wide a 
sweep, and it is open to the objection that, unless the wall ran 
south-ward along the west side of the Tyropceon Valley, there 
would have been a descent and not an ascent to the Antonia. 
On the other hand, if the wall continued eastward beyond the 
Damascus Gate, it would have enclosed parts of Be^etha which 
were outside the second wall. 

^ These included stamped pottery and an inscribed column {Quarterly 
Statement, 1886, pp. 21-24, 72, 73). 

^ The masonry of the fragments A, B, C, so far as it is known, diffejrs so 
much in character that it is not easy to maintain the view that A, B, and C 
are parts of a continuous wall. 


It may be added that no remains of important walls have 
l)een found to the north of a line drawn west from the Porta 
Jvdiciaria (J on Fig. 9) ; that the accumulation of rubbish is far 
greater and more general to the south of that line than it is to 
the north of it, where the rock is often visible ; and that whilst 
rock-hewn chambers, cisterns, and caves are common to the south 
of the same line, they are almost unknown to the north of it.^ 

Advocates of the authenticity of Golgotha accept the theory 
of the late Dr. Schick,^ that the wall turned abruptly to the east 
at the end of fragment A, and then followed the zigzag course of 
the Haret el-Mawdzin^ to some massive masonry (E^) at the corner 
of Christian Street. The ruins at a sharp bend in the former 
street (D), now known to be mediaeval, were supposed by 
Dr. Schick to be the remains of an old corner tower. From E^ 
the wall is carried across Christian Street to a block of masonry 
(F), and thence eastward to a fragment of a wall (G) which runs 
east and west under the centre of the German Church of the 
Redeemer, and stands upon debris of some depth. A little 
further east the wall is assumed to turn at a right angle and join 
the ruins in the Russian Convent (H). These remains are 
supposed to extend northward to the traditional Porta Judiciaria 
(J), and to have formed part of the eastern side of a large castle 
at right angles to the wall. They have not, however, the 
characteristics of ancient fortifications, and neither the historical 
records nor the natural features of the ground lend support to 
the view that the re-entering angle^ at this point was occupied by 
an important fort. The masonry faced with large stones is 

^ Schick, in Quarterly StafementilSQS, ])ip. 192^193; Fierottif Jerusalem 
Expedition, i, 33. 

2 Zeitschrift des DeuUchen Paldstina-VereinSy vol. viii, and Plates, 
especially PI. 8 ; Quarterly Statement, 1893, pp. 191-93, and Plan. The 
best paper in support of this theory is by E. P. Vincent {Revue Biblique, 
1902, pp. 31-57). 

^ The zigzag course is supposed to indicate the existence beneath the 
surface of a wall with towers. 

* A large castle in a re-entering angle, as suggested by Dr. Schick, would 
be contrary to the rules of fortification, and is unknown in the defences of 
any ancient city. 


probably part of the eastern wall in front of the entrance to 
Constantine's Basilica. It undoubtedly contains stones taken 
from earlier buildings, possibly from the second wall, but it could 
not have belonged to the defences of the city. Dr. Schick places 
a gate tower at J, and then carries the wall eastward along a high 
rock-scarp ^ to a block of masonry at the " House of Veronica " 
(K, see Fig. 8). From this point the wall, after crossing the 
Tyropoeon, is carried up along the south side of the ditch to the 
Antonia. According to Dr. Schick ^ the assumed wall was protected 
by a wide ditch, which extended from the Jaffa Gate to the 
St. Stephen's Gate.^ This ditch is entirely imaginary. No certain 
evidence of its existence has been found anywhere excepting at 
the place where it separated the Antonia from Bezetha. At 
several points, even where the ditch is said to have been traceable 
— on the west side of the supposed castle — there is now known 
to be solid rock, as on the north and south sides of the Chapel of 
St. Helena. Unfortunately, Dr. Schick, whose accuracy as regards 
measurement is well known, rarely made any distinction either 
in his writings or in his drawings between existing and assumed 
remains.^ He considered it necessary to identify everything 
that he found, and his enthusiasm frequently led him astray in 
his efforts to complete or support preconceived theories.^ This 
tendency is most marked in his attempt to define the course of 
the secoTid wall and its ditch ; and it is to be regretted that his 
views have been so widely adopted. There is no evidence that 

^ Quarterly Statement^ 1890, p. 20. It is doubtful wlietber tliis scarp is 
continuous ; but if the wall ran tbis way it may mark the position of a 
strong tower at the salient. 

^ Zeitschrift des Dentschen Paldstina- Vereins, vol. Tiii, PI. 8. 

^ Guthe holds the same view {ihid., viii, p. 278). 

■* Schick writes, " merely to say that this and this was found, would have 
been to show that I did not understand things of antiquity" {Quarterly 
Statement ^ 1893, p. 122). This explains his wish to identify every isolated 
fragment of masonry. 

^ Schick's mind was always open, and he never neglected to publish new 
facts even when they disproved his theories. Thus, in his paper on " The 
Site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre*' {Quarterly Statement^ 1898, p. 
145^.), he acknowledges that the view of the lie of the rock upon which he 
based his theory of the ditch of the second wall was wrong. 


the isolated fragments of masonry, some of which differ widely 
in character and construction, ever formed part of a continuous 
wall ; and there is no certainty that either of them belonged to 
the second wall. 

The second theory is that the fragments of an old wall (E, E^) 
(see Fig. 9) on the west side of Christian Street are portions both 
of the " broad wall " and of the second wall ; ^ and that the Gate 
Genath was near the point P, where a southerly prolongation of the 
east side of Hezekiah's Pool would strike the first wall. From the 
Gate Genath, which may have been in the west side of a tower 
like that in one of the towers at S, the wall is supposed to run 
northward to E^ ; and then, either to turn eastward to F and G 
and follow the line proposed by Schick to the Antonia or to 
continue northward to the fragment of a wall at E^. From this 
last point the wall would follow the north side of the street KMt 
el-Khdngeh^ to the Fo^ia Judiciaria (J), and thence an un- 
determined line to the Antonia. It would appear, from what 
Saewulf says, that, at the commencement of the twelfth century 
there was a conspicuous wall in the position indicated by the 
fragments E and E^. 

" The church is situated on the declivity of Mount Sion, as was the 
city itself, =* after that the Eoman priiices, Titus and Vespasian, had, by 
the vengeance of the Lord, destroyed from the foundatious the whole 
city of Jerusalem .... We know that our Lord suffered without the 
gate. But the Emperor Hadrian, who was called Helias, rebuilt the 
city of Jerusalem, and the Temple of the Lord, and extended the city 
as far as the Tower of David,* which formerly had been some distance 
from the city ; as anyone can see from the Mount of Olives, where the 
extreme west walls of the city formerly were,* and how much the city 
was afterwards extended."® 

* The view is that Nehemiah rebuilt a wall of the time of the monarchy, 
and that the second wall of Josephus was, in all essential particulars, the wall 
of Nehemiah. 

2 Excavations have shown that there could have been no ditch or city 
wall between the north side of the street and the church. 

' This would be the region of the bazars, which was occupied by squatters 
after the siege. 

•* The wall A occupies the position referred to. 

' The wall E, E^ on the east side of the pool. 

^ Saewulf, Pilgrimage, pp. 9, 10 ; Palestine Pilgrims^ Texts, vol. iv. 



The position of this wall, and its distance from the citadel, 
satisfies the requirements of the narrative of Josephus. But 
there is no evidence that the wall extended north of E^, or south 
of the pool ; and none of the existence of a ditch, unless, aa is 
probable, the "Pool of Hezekiah" formed part of one.^ The 
character of the masonry at E^ is also different from that at 
E and E^ The Poiia Judidaria occupies the right position for 
the north gate in the wall, but here again there is no evidence, 
and the tradition may be nothing more than a reminiscence of the 
fact that at the point where the second wall crossed the main 
street there was an important gateway. 

Assuming that the tower Psephinus was at the north-west 
angle of the modern city (see Fig. 8), where it is placed by most 
commentators, the tent of Titus would have been quite 300 yards 
from any point of the suggested wall, E, E^, E^, but not so far 
from that represented by A, D, E. 

Conder maintains ^ that " the nature of the ground admits of 
no other line " but one which " started near the Tower of David." 
But at the period when the wall was first built command was a 
secondary consideration, and the occupation of the higher ground 
was not necessary for defence. 

The third view is that the second wall commenced at the 
traditional Gate Genath (L), and ran northwards, past some 
fragments of masonry (M, M^) mentioned by Pierotti,^ to the 
remains in the Kussian Convent (H) and the Porta Judidaria (J). 
Thence it followed the line proposed by Schick to the Antonia.* 
The traditional Gate Genath stands on an accumulation of 
rubbish no less than 25J feet deep,^ and it is probably not earlier 
than the fifth or sixth century. So little is known of the 

^ This view is held byM. Clermont- Qunneau (Quarterli/ Statement, 1901^ 
p. 298). 

^ Quarterly Statement^ 1883, p. 73. 

^ Jerusalem Bxplored, i, 33. 

* This view is maintained by Pierotti {I.e.) j Fiirrer, Art. " Qolgotha," in 
Schenkel's Bihel Lexicon; and R. P. Germer-Durand (Ethos d' Orient, voL 
vi, pp. 160-174). 

^ Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 276. 


masonry seen by Pierotti that no opinion can be formed as to its 
date. It may have belonged to a wall separating the baz4rs from 
the quarter of the town to the west. The principal objections to 
the third view are the small area the wall would enclose ; the 
close proximity, for a considerable distance, of the wall to the 
principal street of the city ; the apparent absence of any impor- 
tant ruins between the points L and H ; and the existence of no 
visible trace of a ditch. 

The only safe conclusion seems to be that no certain trace of 
the second wall has yet been found. Possibly one or other of the 
isolated masses of masonry noticed above may be a fragment of 
that wall, or mark its position at a particular point ; but none 
of them, singly or collectively, supply definite evidence with 
regard to the course of the wall, or throw light upon the question 
whether it included or excluded the site of the Church of the 
Holy Sepulchre. The massive masonry at E west of Christian 
Street appears to me to have formed part of the second wall, but 
extensive excavation alone can show whether this is the case, 
and, if so, where the wall turned east, and where it crossed the 
street Khan ez-Zeit and the Tyropoeon Valley. 

Third Wall. 

The third wall " commenced at the tower Hippicus, whence it 
extended as far as the north quarter to the tower Psephinus, 
after which it advanced until it came opposite the tombs of 
Helena,^ Queen of Adiabene, and, prolonged through the royal 
caves,2 bent round at a tower at the corner by what is called the 
Fuller's Tomb, and joining the old encircling wall, ended at the 
ravine called Kidron."^ The wall was 15 feet thick and 30 feet 
high. It was built with large stones so that it could not be 
easily mined, or shaken by battering rams. The tower Psephinus 
was octagonal, and 105 in height. 

In the northern part of the wall, opposite the Tomb of 
Helena, there was a gateway protected by the "Women's 

•^ Josephus, WarSj v, 4, § 2, 3. 


Towers"; from this the main road to Shechem (Nablus) ran 
northward across the plateau in a straight line. On the west 
side of the road certainly, and probably on the east side also, the 
ground was occupied by enclosed gardens, and their walls, fences 
and ditches rendered the free movement of troops impossible.^ 
The wall was commenced by King Agrippa, circa A.D. 41, but 
attention having been drawn to its exceptional strength, its com- 
pletion was forbidden by Claudius Caesar. The state of the wall 
when work upon it was suspended is unknown; on this point 
Josephus is not clear,2 but it would appear from his account of a 
reconnaissance by Titus,^ that more progress.had been made on 
the east and north fronts than on the west. The wall was 
restored after the retreat of Cestius,^ and completed by the 
insurgent Jews before the siege by Titus commenced. 

The third wall was built to protect the suburbs to the north 
of the Temple, which, having grown up since the completion of 
the Castle of Antonia by Herod, were not sufficiently protected 
against the attack of an enemy. The city had " gradually crept 
beyond its encircling walls, and the inhabitants, forming into one 
city the parts to the north of the Temple in addition to the hill, 
advanced to a considerable distance, and thus a fourth hill, which 
is called Bezetha, was surrounded with dwelling houses." ^ The 
hill known as Bezetha was opposite to the Castle of Antonia, 
and was separated from it by a rock-hewn ditch which is still, 
in part, visible. It was the highest of the hills upon which 
Jerusalem was then built, and may safely be identified at the 
ridge stretching northward from the Turkish barracks. There 
would seem to have been two suburbs, called Bezetha or 
Kainopolis, " New City," i.e., the upper and the lower, and, from 
the distinction which Josephus, apparently, makes between the 

1 IFar*, iv, 2, § 2. 

'-^ Work was stopped after the foundations had been laid {Wars, v, 4, 
§ 2). Agrippa died before he had built the wall as high as he intended 
(TFarSf ii, 11, § 6). Agrippa fortified the walls that included the "New 
City," partly widening and partly making them higher (Ant, xix, 7, § 2). 

« JFars, V, 6, § 2. * Wars, ii, 22, § 1. 

» Wars, V, 4, § 2. 


hill and the suburbs,^ it may be inferred, perhaps, that one of 
the latter lay in the Tyropoeon valley to the west of the hill, and 
the other in " St. Anne's Eavine " to the east of it.^ West of the 
Tyropoeon valley the ground between the second and third walls 
was sparsely occupied by houses.^ 

The " Koyal Caves " is the only place named in the descrip- 
tion of the wall by Josephus with regard to which there is almost 
complete certainty. They are the great underground caverns 
east of the Damascus Gate, of which the Cotton Grotto, and 
Jeremiah's Grotto, formed part. There is evidence that these 
quarries were worked in pre-Exilic times, and no other important 
caverns are known on the north side of Jerusalem. 

The tower Psephinus was at the west end, and the corner 
tower by the Fuller's tomb at the east end of the north front. 
The position of the tombs of Helena is uncertain. They were 
not rock-hewn tombs, but three pyramids in which the bones of 
the Adiabene family were buried.^ They are said to have been 
six hundred yards from the city, but the point from which the 
distance was reckoned is unknown. The allusions to the tombs 
in Josephus indicate a closer proximity to the third wall than 
600 yards, and it may be that the distance was calculated from 
the north gate of the second wall, and not from that of the 
later third wall. After the foundation of -^lia, the point of 
origin appears to have been at or near the centre of the Colony,^ 
and this would be the point from which distances were measured 
in the time of Eusebius. The pyramids of Helena are usually 

^ Bezetha is about 40 feet lower than the ground at the north-west 
corner of the city, but this part was not built over at the time of the siege. 

2 Wars, V, 12, § 2. 

3 Wars, V, 6, § 2. 

*' Monobazus gave instructions that they (the bones) should be buried 
in the three pyramids which their mother had built at a distance of three 
stadia (600 yards) from tlie city " (Josephus, Ant, xx, 4, § 3). 

' Measuring back from the third milestone on the road from Jerusalem 
to Neapolis (Nablus), which is on or near its original position, the point 
of origin would be south of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre {Revue 
JSiblique, x, p. 96). This seems to indicate that the point of origin was 
either the centre of the colony, the north gate of the second wall, or the 
north gate of the Legionary Fortress. 


placed at the "Tombs of the Kings," but this well known 
sepulchre is too far from the city — 2,630 feet — or nearly four and 
a half stadia from the Damascus Gate. It would appear from 
the distances given below,i that if the Porta Judiciaria (J on plan. 
Fig. 8), which possibly marks the position of the north gate of 
the seamd wall, was the point of origin, the knoll (W on plan), 
on which Conder locates the tomb of Christ, is the most probable 
site for the pyramids.^ If, on the other hand, distances were 
measured from a point at or near the Damascus Gate, the 
cistern (U on plan) to the east of the road to the " Tombs of the 
Kings " could, perhaps, satisfy the conditions as regards distance*. 
The wall of Agrippa appears to have been planned on a scale 
of Herodian grandeur. That portion of it which closed, and 
still closes, the " St. Anne^s Kavine," is a magnificent specimen of 
mural masonry, and there is no reason to suppose that the 
remaining sections, so far as they had progressed during the 
King's reign, were constructed with less skill. Like similar 
defences of the period, the wall was probably protected by a 
ditchi except in those places where it crossed a ravine or stood 
above scarped rock. The insurgent Jews had sufficient time 
before the siege to complete the wall in accordance with the 
original designs, but they failed apparently to take full advan- 
tage of their opportunity. In places the wall was finished 
hurriedly, and the ditch probably was not excavated every- 
where to its full depth. When however every allowance is 

^ Distance from tlie Tombs of the Kings to the Damascus Gtite • . 2630 ft. 

Porta Judiciaria. . 3470 „ 
Legionary Fortress 4480 „ 
„ Cistern U to the Damascus G^ate . . . . 1500 

Porta Judiciaria . . . . 2370 „ 

>> >» »» 

,, „ ,, Legionary Fortress .. 3380,, 

„ Knoll W to the Damascus Gate .. .. 850 „ 

»> »j 

„ Porta Judiciaria .. •• 1720,, 

,. Legionary Fortress . . 2730 „ 

Josephus gives the distance from the Pyramids to the City.. .. 1800 „ 

'^ This identification was firbt proposed by Pierotti {Jerusalem JEx^ 

plored, i, 37). At the knoll there is a rock platform roughly scarped on all 

sides {Quarterly State^nent^ 1883, p. 75). 


made for hasty completion and frequent demolitions, the fact 
remains that a work of such magnitude could not have dis- 
appeared without leaving definite traces of its existence. Such 
traces are visible in that portion of the present north wall which, 
commencing at the Jaffa Gate and ending a short distance east 
of the " St. Anne's Kavine," encloses the northern quarter of the 
city. North of that wall no continuous ditch, no fragment of 
a tower, and no masonry that could have formed part of a city 
wall has yet been found. ^ The present city wall is protected by 
a continuous rock-hewn scarp, the bases of many of the towers 
are rock hewn, and here and there the masonry is excellent.^ It 
includes the hill Bezetha, and the ground north of the Temple 
upon which the " suburbs " must have stood. It crosses the 
eastern spur of the plateau at the most convenient point, where 
the underground quarries facilitated the excavation of a broad, 
deep ditch, and it runs through these quarries as the third wall 
ran through the Koyal Caves, and agrees generally with all that 
Josephus says with regard to the outer line of defence. 

The objections to a wall north of the present one, apart from 
the absence of distinct traces of a ditch and mural masonry, are : 
that such a wall was not necessary for the defence of Bezetha, 
that it would have enclosed much unoccupied groimd, that its 
wide front would have been a serious source of weakness, and 
that a very much larger garrison would have been required 
for its defence than there is any reason to suppose was ever 
quartered at Jerusalem. It may be remarked also that there is 
nothing in the history of the city during the period from the 
death of Herod the Great to the accession of Agrippa to justify 
the believer that the growth of the population had been so great 

^ During the last thirty years a considerable part of the plateau north 
of the existing wall has been coTered with houses and gardens; but the 
excavations carried out during the building operations have disclosed nothing 
which supports the view that the city, at anytime, exceeded its present 
limits. For the opinion of Dr. Sobinson on the line of the third wall, see 
Appendix VIII. 

^ At several points Schick found the remains of an ancient wall a few 
feet outside the present one. 


as to justify such a wide extension of its limits either on the 
eastern or the western hill. 

On the whole, therefore, it appears probable that the third 
wall in the time of the siege followed approximately the same 
lines as the existing north wall of Jerusalem. 

3. The Walls of the Roman Camp, A.D. 70-132. — Jerusalem, 
after its capture by the Komans, became a Legionary fortress, or 
permanent " Camp " ; and it so remained until the revolt of the 
Jews in the reign of Hadrian (a.d. 132). No record of the size 
of the "Camp*' has been preserved; no tradition exists with 
regard to its position ; and no trace of its limits has yet been 

Titus, when ordering the demolition of the fortifications of 
the city, decided to spare the west wall of the " Upper City," 
that it might serve as a barrack for his troops ; and the three 
towers Phasaelus, Hippicus, and Mariamne, that they might 
show future generations how strong the defences of Jerusalem 
had been. The troops left by Titus as a garrison consisted of 
the Tenth Legion, Fretensis, with certain auxiliaries — troops of 
horsemen, and companies of footmen. ^ From the above it may 
be inferred that the north-west angle of the ** Camp " was near 
the Jaffa Gate, where the fortified palace of Herod and the three 
towers stood. Unfortunately, nothing is known of the steps 
which the Koman engineers took to convert Jerusalem into a 
Legionary fortress. The circumstances were so exceptional that 
they may have abandoned their normal arrangements. On 
the other hand, it seems probable that they carried out their 
work in accordance with the general principles governing the 
construction of fortified camps, and that, wherever it was 
practicable, they utilised the existing fortifications. 

The " Upper City ** was defended on its north, west, and 
south sides by the jint wall, and on its east side by a wall 
that ran along the low cliff on the right of the Tyropceon 

^ Josephus, Wars^ vii, 1, §§ 1, 2. The legion, or the bulk of if, was 
doubtless quartered at Jerusalem; the auxiliaries may have garrisoned 
forts at important points in Judeea. 


Valley. This wall is not mentioned by Josephus,^ but its 
existence may be inferred from the fact that the " Upper City " 
was able to hold out after the Temple and the " Lower City " 
were in the hands of the Komans. Titus was obliged to under- 
take regular siege operations before he could force an entrance.^ 
When at last the "Upper City'* fell, its fortifications, with 
the exception of a breach in the west wall, were intact.^ 

It may be regarded as almost certain that for the north and 
west walls of the " Camp " the engineers utilised portions of the 
first or old wall, but the trace adopted for the east and south 
walls is not so clearly indicated. A Legionary fortress was, as a 
rule, a square or oblong, with rounded angles, and about 50 acres 
in extent. Thus Caerleon is 51 acres, York probably 48, Chester 
probably 53, Lambsesis 52, and Bonn 61 ; the proportion of length 
to breadth varies in each case.^ The " Camp " at Jerusalem may 
not have been of the usual form, but if the bulk of the Legion 
was quartered there, its area would be normal, and, in attempting 
to locate it, a space of about 50 acres must be allowed. The 
ground enclosed by the walls of the "Upper City" — about 
74^ acres in extent — ^is now unequally divided by the south wall 
of the modern town. That portion lying north of the city wall 
has an area of about 48J acres, and, very possibly, its limits may 
be those of the Eoman " Camp." It is quite conceivable that the 
engineers utilised the north, east, and west walls of the "Upper 
City," and, to complete the defences, connected the two last 
by a new wall which followed a line still preserved by the 

^ This is not remarkable, for Joseplius, in his description of the walls, 
never alludes to the great peribolos wall of the Temple precincts which still 
attract the wonder and admiration of travellers. The firagments of masonry 
referred to by Schick {Quarterly Statement, 1898, pp. 81, 82) may have 
belonged to the wall. 

2 Wars, vi, 8, I. 

3 Ihid,, vi, 8, 4. 

* For information with regard to existing Legionary fortresses, and for 
many valuable suggestions as to the manner in which the Komans wduld 
probably set about the formation of their " Camp " at Jerusalem, I am much 
indebted to Mr. F. Haverfield. 

wall of the modern city.' An approximate rectangle, well 

Fis. 10.— Oakf op thb Tbnth Leoioit at jBBrsucH. 

defended on all sides, and of the regulation size, would thus be 

' There lias never been any eatiefoctor; eiplanalion of the origin of the 
eonth wall of JerDialem which, for no oatensible reason, eiolndct a, quarter 


fonned on the highest part of the hill.^ According to this view 

" the Camp '* extended, approximately, from David Street to 

the south wall, and from the west wall to the conduit from 

" Solomon's Pools." 

The fortifications not utilised in the construction of "the 

Camp " were demolished, and on the south the demolition appears 

to have been complete.^ How far this was the case on the north 

is unknown, but it is reasonable to suppose that those portions of 

the second and third walls in the immediate vicinity of "the 

Camp " were overthrown, and that the ground was levelled over 

their ruins. The Eoman engineers would not have neglected 

such an obvious military precaution, and have left cover for 

a possible enemy in close proximity to their defences. Inside 

** the Camp," the principal street of the ancient city, the line of 

which is still preserved, no doubt became the Via principalis^ with 

its Northern Gate near the south-east corner of the Muristan, and 

its Southern Gate at the spot where the Sion Gate stood before 

the walls were rebuilt by Sultan Suleiman. The West Gate was, 

probably, at or near the gate in the west wall mentioned by 

Mukaddasi, a.d. 985,^ but no trace remains of this gate or of the 

street which must have led eastward from it. Possibly the 

Armenian gardens on the west, and the waste ground on the 

south* represent on those sides the clear spaces that were 

always left between the walls and the quarters of the soldiers. 

that must have been one of the pleasantest in the ancient city. The true 
solution of the problem seems to be that the *' Gamp " existed as a military 
station long after the reign of Hadrian ; and that eventually, when the 
garrison of Jerusalem was nominal, and the " Camp " was no longer required, 
its south wall became the southern limit of the city. 

^ I was formerly of opinion that the limits of the " Upper City " were 
those of the " Camp/' but I have abandoned this view in consequence of the 
strong evidence that the normal area of a Legionary fortress did not vary 
greatly from 60 acres, and the fact that the area of the " Upper City *' was 
as much as 74i acres. 

^ See the description of the state of the old walls by Dr. Bliss (Bliss and 
Dickie, Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894-97). 

^ Guy le Strange, Palestine under the Moslems, pp. 214-17. The gate 
was called Bdh et-Tih. 

* During the last 50 years most of this ground has been taken up for 


Outside "the Camp" Roman and foreign merchants, and 
those Jews who had taken no part in war, would settle down 
amidst the ruins of the ancient city for the purposes of trade. 
These squatters probably rebuilt the old bazars that lay between 
the first and second walls ; ^ and those of them who were not Jews 
may have erected a small temple or shrine of Astarte on a 
site so convenient to the bazars as that now occupied by the 
Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Whether any cariabce grew up 
to the south of " the Camp " is uncertain, but it is pleasant 
to think that Christian families may have settled down in 
this locality after their return from Pella, and that they may 
have foimded " the mother church of Sion " on the ruins of 
the house in which Christ had partaken of the Last Supper, 
with His disciples. Within the walls of the Legionary fortress 
there could have been no church, synagogue, or temple. 

4. The Walls of j^lia CapUolina, — During the revolt of the 
Jews in the reign of Hadrian " the Camp " and the suburbs in 
its vicinity were taken by the insurgents and recaptured by the 
Bomans. How far they suffered in the prolonged struggle it is 
impossible to say; but it is reasonable to suppose that, whilst 
the canabce may have been destroyed, the strong walls of the 
Legionary fortress were not seriously injured. 

When Hadrian was able to carry out his project of rebuilding 
Jerusalem as a heathen city, one of the first steps that he would 
take would be to reoccupy " the Camp " with Legionary troops, 
and restore its walls where they had been breached. The 
presence of a large Eoman garrison in the "Upper City" of 
Josephus is indicated by several centurial inscriptions on the 
tubes of the stone syphon of the " High Level Aqueduct." ^ This 

^ Tliis appears to have been the belief at the commencement of the 
twelfth century, for Ssewulf writes that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre 
was " situated on the declivit j of Mount Sion, as was the city itself ; after 
that the Roman -princes, Titus and Vespasian, had by the vengeance of 
the Lord destroyed from the foundations the whole city of Jerusalem." 
Palestine Pilgrims^ Texts , vol. iv). 

^ The aqueduct may have been constructed by Herod the Great when 
he built his fortified palace in the " Upper City " {WarSy v, 4, § 4), or it 


aqueduct is the only one capable of delivering a steady stream 
of water at the level of " the Camp," and its preservation in a 
thorough state of repair would be a matter of special importance 
to the garrison. The Legionary fortress, as elsewhere, would be 
quite distinct from the civil town which Hadrian made a Colonia. 
Its walls would long remain, and, on the north and south sides, 
they appear to have lasted to the reign of Constantine.^ The 
interval which separated the fortress from the " Colony " would 
coincide very nearly with "David Street." A passage in the 
Amials of Eutychius, to which M. Clermont-Ganneau has called 
attention,^ appears to contain an allusion to the northern face of 
the Legionary fortress as restored by Hadrian : — ** The Greeks 
established themselves there (in jElia) and constructed a fortress 
at the gate of the Temple called el-Behd,^ . . . This fortress 
exists to-day at the gate of Jerusalem, and is called the Mihrdb 
of David." * 

No early writer describes the walls built by Hadrian to 
protect the civil city, --lElia Capitolina, and there is no record of 
any reconstruction or extension earlier than the fifth century. ^ 
It may be inferred from this absence of information that the 
walls of Constantine's city were the walls of jElia, and that on 
the north, at least, these walls are represented, conventionally, 
on the plan of Jerusalem in the Madeba mosaic. It is conceiv- 

may hare been a Boman military "work carried out by the garrison after the 
capture of the city by Titus. The inscriptions gire no certain date. For a 
discussion on these points, see Quarterly Statement, 1905, pp. *7o-'J^. 

^ The Bordeaux Pilgrim, a.d. 333, found the house of Caiaphas outside, 
and David's Palace, i.e., " David's Tower," inside " the wall of Sion " ; and, 
going northwards to the gate of Neapolis, i.e., the Damascus G-ate, he went 
** out of the wall of Sion." These walls correspond to the north and south 
walls of the fortress. 

^ Becueil d* Archeoloffie Orient ale vi, pp. 279 sqq, 

^ The gate el-JBehd, ** the Gute of Beauty," is apparently the present £db 
eS'Silsilehf the " Q-olden G-ate '* of the Middle Ages. 

* This seems to indicate the citadel at the Jaffa Gate. 

B <* The site of the city is almost circular, enclosed within a circuit of 
walls of no small extent, whereby it now receives within itself Mount Sion, 
which was once outside " (Eucherius, Palestine Pilgrims'' Texts^ toI. ii). 
This enclosure of Mount Sion took place before Eudocia (a.d. 449-460) 
built the wall that included the Pool of Siloam. 

K 2 


able that Hadrian built his wall nearly on the line of the third 
wall of the ancient city; and this view derives some support 
from the Madeba mosaic and from the Itinerary of the Bordeaux 
Pilgrim. In the former, city gates are clearly shown in positions 
that are approximately those of the present Jaffa, Damascus, and 
St. Stephen Gates. From the Itinerary it would appear that the 
Birket Isratl, the pool near the Church of St. Anne, and the twin 
pools near the Convent of the Sisters of Sion, were within the 
walls in A.D, 333.^ The wall of -^lia appears, in fact, to have 
followed the course of the present wall, except, perhaps, near the 
Jaffa Gate, where it seems to have been drawn in so as to give 
" David^s Tower " and the citadel a clear front. 

Some interesting suggestions with regard to the public 
buildings of .^lia mentioned in the Paschal Chronicle have 
recently been made by Father Germer-Durand.^ The learned 
Augustinian identifies the Trikameron ^ with the temple of Jupiter 
Capitolinus and its three cellce, and considers the Kodra, that is 
" Quadra,"to be the great quadrangular enclosure, Hardm esh-Shertf, 
in which the Trikameron stood. He sees in the two demosia 
municipal buildings connected with the administration of the city, 
and in the Tetranymphon, a bath with four porticos — ^possibly the 
Pool of Siloam, which, according to the Bordeaux Pilgrim, was 
gmdriporticas,^ The Dodekajpylon he regards as the double colon- 
nade of the principal thoroughfare divided by three tetrapylonSy and 
its name, " the steps," he explains by the steps in the street. But 
in this last case an identification with some part of the fortifica- 
tions, or with some great work connected with the approach from 
the civil city to the temple of Jupiter ^ would seem preferable. 

^ The Bordeaux Pilgrim. Palegtine Pilgrimt^ Texts, vol. i. 

2 Echos d* Orient, 1904, pp. 65-71 ; see also Eemie Bihlique, 1, pp. 1369-87. 

^ The Trikameron would more naturally be a building with three vaulted 
rooms like the Basilica of Maxentius at Borne ; but the identification 
proposed above is quite possible. 

■* Palestine Pilgrim^ Texts, vol. i. 

* The approach appears to have been by a viaduct, perhaps reached by 
steps, at ** Wilson's Arch*'* The Dodekapylon may refer to the columns in 
front of the temple of Jupiter and the steps that led up to the platform 
upon which they stood. 


List of Authors and Authorities referred to. 

Alexander ab Alexandre. Dies Oeniales, 

Alexander Monachus. Be Inventione Sanctce Orucis^ > 

EpUtola ad Evstathium, 
Alf ord, H. The Oreeh Testament 
Ambrose. Exposition of St. Luke^s Gospel, 

Commentary on Psalm xlmL 

Letter to Horontianus, 
Anastasius Sinaita. Hexameron, 

Andreas, Archbishop of Crete. On the Exaltation of the Cross, 
Apostolical Constitution, The. 
Appian. The History of Rams. 
Arculfus. Narrative about the Holy Places. 
Athanasius. De Passions et Cruce Domini, 
Augustine. Sermones Supposititii. 

Barclay, J. T. The City of the Great King, 
Baronius, C. Ecclesiastical Annals, 
Bartolocci, J. Bihliotheca Rahhinica, 
Basil of Cesarea. Commentary on, Isaiah, 
Basil of Seleucia. Oration 38. 
Basnage, J. de B. Histoire des Juifs, 
Bede, The Venerable. On the Holy Places, 

Treatise on St. Matthew, 
Bernard the Wise. Itinerary in the Holy Land. 
Bliss, F. J., and A. Dickie. Excavations at Jerusalem, 
Bordeaux Pilgrim, The. Itinerary to Jerusalem. 
Bovet, F. Voyage en Terre Sainte. 
Brandt, W. Die Evangelische Geschichte und der Ursprung des 

Breviary of Jerusalem, The, 

Burchard of Mount Sion. A Description of the Holy Land. 
Bynseus, A. De Morte Jesu Christi. 

Caignart de Saulcy, L. F. J. Numismatique de la Terre Sainte, 


Calistus, N. Ecclesiastical History, 
Cedrenus, G. Compendium of History, 

Chaplin, T. Articles in Quarterly Statement of tJie Palestine Explora- 
tion Fund, 
Chateaubriand, F. R. de. Itin&aire de Paris d Jirusalem, 
Chrysostom. Commentary on St, John, 

Oration 5 against the Jews, 
HomUy 85. 
Clarke, E. D. Travels in the Holy Land, 
Clarke, T. Foreign Theological Library, 
Clos, E. M. Kreuz urvd Grab Jesu, 
Codex Theodosianus. 
Conder, Colonel C. Handbook to the Bible, 

Tent Work in Palestine, 
Cyprian. Epistola ad Comelium Papam de cardinxdibus operibus 

Cyril of Jerusalem. Cateclietical Lectures, 

Letter to Constantius. 

Daniel, The Abbot. Pilgrimage to the Holy Land, 

Dawson, J. "W. Egypt and Syria, 

De Saulcy. {See Caignart.) 

Dictionary of the Bible, The, by Rev. J. Hastings, D.D. 

Dictionary of the Bible, The, by Sir W. Smith, LL.D. 

Didymus Alexandrinus. De Trinitate, 

Dillmann, C. F, A. Das Christliche Adambuch des Morgenlandes, 

Dion Cassius. The History of Rom^e, 

Echos d'Orient. 

Edersheim, A. The Life and Titnes of Jesus tlie Messiah, 

Encyclopaedia Biblica, The. 

Epiphanius. De Mensuris et Pondibus, 

Adverstis Hcereses, 
Ersch, J. S., and J. G. GrUber. Allgemsine Encyklopcedie der Wissen- 

schaften und Kunste, 
Eucherius. The Epitome about certain Holy Places. 
Eusebius. The Life of Constantine. 

The Praise of Constantine, 

Ecclesiastical History, 

The Demonstration of the Gospel, 

The Onomasticon, 

On the Theophania, 
Eutychius of Alexandria. The Annxds, 
Ewald, S. JaMmcher der Biblischen Wissenschaft, 


Fabri, Felix. The Book of the Wanderirigs, 

Fabricius, J. A. Codex Pseudepigraphus Veteris Testammtt. 

Fallmerayer, J. P. Oesammdte Werke, 

Fergusson, J. The Temples of the Jews, 

The Ancient Topography of Jenisalem. 

The Holy Sepulchre and the Temple, 
Finlay, G. The History of Greece, 
Fr^jus. Liber de Terra Sancta, 
Fuller, T. A Pisgah-Sight of Palestine, 
Furrer. Wanderungen durch Paldstirut, 

Ganneau, C. C. Archaeological Researches in Palestine. 

L^ Authenticity du Saint Sepulchre, 
Gordon, C. G. Re/lections in Palestine, 
Gregory Nazianzen. Christtis Patiens, 
Gregory of Tours. The Ecclesiastical History of France, 
Gretzer, J. Omnia Opera, 

Guilielmus de Boldensele. Hodceporicon ad Terram Sanctam, 
Guthe. Articles in A, Hauck's Realencyklopcedie fur Protestantische 


Hanauer, J. E. Articles in Quarterly Statanent of the Palestine 

Exploration Fund, 
Hamack, C. G. A. The History of Dogma, 
Hastings, J. The Dictionary of the Bible. 

Hauck, A. Realencyklopcedie fiir Protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 
Hilarius, Bishop of Poitiers. Treatise on Psalms Iviii, lix. 

Commentary on St, Matthew, 
Hildebrand, J. De precibus veterum Christianorum, 
Hilprecht, H. von. Recent Research in Bible Lands, 
Howe, Fisher. The True Site of Calvary, 

Illgen, C. F. Zeitschrift fur die historische Theologie, 

Jacques de Vitry. The History of Jerusalem, 
Jerome. Commentary on Ezekiel, 
„ „ Daniel, 


St, Matthew, 
St, Mark, 
The Ephesians, 


De Viris Hlustribus, 


Jerome. Hpistola ad Dardanum. 
iy „ Paxdinum, 

„ Paula et Evutochu ad Marcdlam, 
Jewish Encydopeedia, The. 
JoeephiLB. The Antiquities of the Jews, 

The Wars of the Jews^ 
Justin Martjrr. The Apology. 

The Dialogue with Trypho, 
Juvencos. Evangelioce Historice, 

Keim, C. T. The History of Jesus of Nazara, (Translated by 

A. Eansom.) 
Korte, J. Reise nach dem weiland Gdobten-Lande. 

Lagarde, P. A. de. Onomastica Sacra. 

Lagrange, P. Articles in Revue Billiq^ie. 

Langlois, V. Un chapitre in^it de la question des Saints Lieux. 

Le Saige, Jacques. Voyage d RomCy J&usalem, dkc. 

Le Strange, Guy. Palestine under the Moslems. 

Lightfoot, Bishop. On the Epistle to the Ephesians. 

Lightfoot, J. Jlorce ffebraicce et Talmuduxe, 

Madden, F. W. The Coins of the Jews. 

Madeba, The Mosaic of. Descriptio7i in Palestine Fund Quarterly 

Statement for 1903. 
Maimonides. Sanhedrin. 

In Beit Ahachria. 
Malan, S. C. The Booh of Adam and Eve. 
Manning, S. Those Holy Fields. 

Mariti, G. Istoria dello stato presents della Citta di Gerasalemme. 
Menzies, A. The Earliest Oospel. 
Merrill, S. East of Jordan. 
Meyer, H. A. W. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New 

Testament. (Translated by Dickson.) 
Migne, J. P. Patrologia Groeca. 

„ Latina. 
Milman, H. H. The History of Christianity. 
Mislin, J. Les Saints Lieux. 

Mommert, C. Golgotha und das heilige Grab zu Jerusalem. 
Monachus, Alexander. De Inventione Sanctce Cnms. 
Monconys, B. de. Journal des Voyages. 
Moses Bar Cepha. De Paradise. 
MUnter, F. C. C. Der Jiidische Krieg unter den Kaisem Trajan tmd 



Munk, S. Paleatiney Description g^ographique, kistoriqtie et archeo- 

Murray's handbook to Rome, 

Handbook to Palestine and Syria. 

New Testament, The ; Revised Version. 
Nicolai, J. De Sepukhria Hebrceorum. 
Nicolaus de Lyra. Commentary on St, Mattheiv, 
Nonnus Panopolitanus. Paraphrase of St. John* 

Old Testament, The ; Ee vised Version. 
Origen. Commentary on St. Matthew. 
Orosius, P. Histories. 

Palestine Exploration Fund, The. Memoirs, 

Qv/arterly Statement, 
Palestine Pilgrims' Texts Society. Publications of Early Travels in 

Palestine^ etc. 
Paschal Chronicle, The. 
Paulinas of Nola. Epistola ad Sevei'um. 
Philo Judaeus. Legatio ad Caium. 
Philon of Byzantium. Treatise on Fortification. 
Pierotti, E. Jerusalem Explored 
Plessing, J. F. Ueber Golgotha und Chtisti Grab. 
Procopius. The Buildings of Justinian. 
Pusey, E. B. The Library of the Fathers. 

Quaresmius, F. Historicay theologica et moralis Terrce Sanctce Elucidatio. 
Quarterly Statement, The, of the Palestine Exploration Fund. 

Eamsay, "W. M. The Church in the Roman Em/pire. 

Recueil d'Arch^ologie Orientale. 

Eeinach, T. Jewish Coins, (Translated by M. Hill.) 

Kenan, J. E. Vie de J4sus. 

Revue Biblique, La. 

Riehm, E. C. A. Handworterbuch des hiblischen Altertums, 

Robinson, E. Biblical Researches in Palestine. 

Rufinus. Historia Ecclesiastica. 

Ssewulf. The Pilgrimage to Jerusalem. 

Sanday, W. The Sacred Sites of the Gospels. 

Schaff, P., and H. Wace. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. 

Schenkel, D. Bibel Lexicon. 


Schick, C Articles in the Qiiarterly Statement of the Palestme 

Exploration Fund, 
Schiirer, E. History of the Jewish People, 
Schumacher, G. Pella, 
Schwab, M. Le Talmud de Jerusalem, 
Sepp, J. N. Jerusalem und das HeUige Land. 
Smith, Dictionary of the Bible, 

Smith, W., and H. Wace. Dictionary of Christian Biography, 
Socrates. Historia Bcdesiastica, 
Sophronius. Anacreontica. 

Be Festo Sancice Crucis. 
Sozomen. Historia Bcclesiastica, 
Spartianus, -^lius. Life of the Emperor Hadrian, 
Speaker's, The, Commentary on the Bible. 
Stanley, A. Sinai and Palestine, 
Suchem, Ludolph von. Description of the Holy Land, 
Sulpicius Severus. Historia Sacra, 
Sylvia, St. Pilgrimage to the Holy Places, 
Syncellus. Chronographia, 

Talmud, The, of Babylon. 

Talmud, The, of Jerusalem. 

Taylor, Bishop Jeremy. The Life of Christ. 

Taylor, I. Ancient Christianity.^ 

TertuUian. Apologia, 

Adversus Jud/CBOs. 

Adversus Marcionem, 
Theodoret. Historia Bcclesiastica, 
Theodosius. The Topography of the Holy Land. 
Theophanes. Chronographia, 

Theophylact. Commentaries on St, Mark and St, John. 
Tobler, T. Itinera Hierosolymitana. 

Unger, F. W. Die Bauten ConstantirHs des Grossen am heiligen Orahe 

zu Jerusalem., 

Vegetius. Military Institutions. 

Victorinus Pictaviensis. Hymnus de Cruce Domini. 

Vitruvius. Architecture, 

Wace, H., and P. Schaff. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. 
Wace, H., and W. Smith. Dictionary of Christian Biography. 
Warren, C. The Recovery of Jerusalem. 
The Temple and the Tomb. 


Wilbrand von Oldenburg. Itineraary to the Holy Land. 

Williams, G. The Holy City. Historical and Topographical Notices of 

Willibald. The Hodaporicon, 

Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina Yereins. 
Zeitschrif t fur die historische Theologie. 
Zeitschrift fur die neuestestamentliche Wissenschaft. 


List of Important Dates. 

I. — Historical Dates. 

Tiberius, Emperor of Rome 

Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judsea 

The Crucifixion 

Marcellus, Procurator of Judaea 

Caligula, Emperor of Rome 

Martyrdom of Stephen 

Claudius, Emperor of Rome 

Herod Agrippa, King of Judaea 

The third wall of Jerusalem built 

Martyrdom of James, the son of Zebedee 

Death of Herod Agrippa ; Cuspius Fadus, Procurator of 
v uciwa ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ..« .. 

Tiberius Alexander, Procurator of Judaea 

Ventidius Cumanus, Procurator of Judaea 

Claudius Felix, Procurator of Judaea 

Nero, Emperor of Rome 

Fortius Festus, Procurator of Judaea 

Death of Festus 

Albinus, Procurator of Judaea 

Martyrdom of James, the brother of the Lord 

Gessius Florus, Procurator of Judaea 

Commencement of the Jewish War 

Flight of the Christians to Pella 

The siege and capture of Jerusalem by the Romans under 

^XvIXej ■•• ••• •*• •*• ••• ••• ••• ••• f v 

Possible date of the return of the Christians from Pella. 

I oee p. u4 ) ••• •.• •.• ••• •.• •.• ... 1 7u 

Jerusalem occupied as a Roman legionary camp 70-132 

Domitian, Emperor of Rome 81 

Nerva, Emperor of Rome 96 

Trajan, Emperor of Rome 98 

Hadrian, Emperor of Rome 117 


. . • 




or 26 



or 33 



or 36 

• ■• 


Circa 37 

or 38 

. *• 


• • . 


• ■• 




Dr of 

« • • 


• •• 


• • • 


• •• 


• •• 


• • • 


• • • 


• • • 




• • • 


• •• 


• • • 


or 68 



Tineius Euf US, Governor of Jerusalem ... . 132 

Bebellion of the Jews under Bar Kpkba 132 

Suppression of the rebellion 135 

Hadrian founds the city -^lia on the site of Jerusalem ... 136 

Marcus Aurelius, Emperor of Eome ... 161 

Diocletian, Emperor of Eome 284 

Constantine, Emperor of Borne 306 

The Conversion of Constantine ... ... .... ... . -r, 312 

The Council of Nicsea . ... 325 

The Empress Helena visits Jerusalem ^ 326 

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre completed ... Qirca 335 

The Jews revolt and are expelled from Jerusalem ... ... 339 

The Council of Jerusalem ... 349 

Julian, Emperor of Bome 360 

Julian attempts to rebuild the temple 363 

II. — Dates of Early Authors, arranged Chronologically. 

Justin Martyr 
Tertullian ... 
Dion Cassius 
Origen ... ... 




Didymus Alexandrinus 



Cyril of Jerusalem... 

Gregory Nazianzen 

Basil of Cesarea 

The Bordeaux Pilgrim's visit to Jerusalem 





Sulpicius Severus ... 
Sozomen ... ... 


Lived drca 




Lived 155-230 















Tnved 312-403 

» • 








Lived 340-397 














••• • ■ • 

OOCIclDcB ••• ••• ••• 

St. Sylvia's visit to Jerusalem 
Nonnus Panopolitanus 



Basil of Seleucia 

The Breviary of Jerusalem 



Antoninus Martyr... 



Anastasius Sinaita. . . 
The Pascal Chronicle 


Andreas of Crete ... 
The Venerable Bede 


Bernard the Wise ... 




The Abbot Daniel ... 

Wilbrand von Oldenburg 
Jacques de Vitry ... 
Burchard of Mount Sion . 
Fr6ju8 (Odoricus de Foro Julii) 
Guilielmus de Boldenseale 
Ludolph von Suchem 


• •• 







Tiived 385-440 










• •• 













Lived 664-637 

Bishop of Tours 





. . • 















• •• 



■ • • 

Lived 876-939 




• a. 







Lived 1131-1204 







. .. 









. .. 





Evidence of Early Christian Writers with regard to 
THE Origin of the Place-name Golgotha.^ 

1. Origen, Commentary on St, Matthew. — ^The Place of a Skull is 
said to have no slight claim to have been the place where he who died 
for men should have died. I have received a tradition to the effect 
that the body of Adam, the first man, was buried upon the spot where 
Christ was crucified, that, as in Adam all die, so in Christ all should 
be made alive : that in the place which is called the Place of a Skull, 
that is, the place of a heady the head of the human race rose again 
in the resurrection of Our Lord and Saviour, who suffered there. 
(Preserved in the Latin translation only.) 

In the Catena there are the following Greek words in MS. : — With 
regard to the Place of a Skull, a Hebrew tradition has come down to 
us that Adam's body is buried there, to the end that as in Adam all 
die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive again. — (Migne, 
Fatrologta Qrcsca^ xiii, col. 1,777.) 

2. Athanasius, De Pasdone et Cruce Domini. — Wherefore he did 
not suffer, he did not hang on the cross in any other place but in the 
Place of a Skull, which the Hebrew teachers declare was Adam's 
sepulchre (^ tU rbv ILpaviov r6nov^ h 'Efipamv ol didda-KoKoi iftojiTi rov 
'Adck/i thai rd(f>ov) : for there they say he was buried after the curse. 
Now, if this be so, I admire the appropriateness of the place, for it 
was needful that Christ, when he was renewing the old Adam, should 
suffer in that place, that by taking away his sin he might set all 
mankind free from it. And whereas God said to Adam, '^ Dust thou 
art, and unto dust shalt thou return " (Gen. iii, 19), He came hither to 
the end that he might find Adam there and free him from that curse ; 
that instead of that " Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return," 
He might say unto him ^* Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from 
the dead, and Christ shall give thee light " ; and, again, *' Eise, come 

^ The translatioDBj except where otherwise stated, are by Mr. Aubrey 
Stewart, M.A. 


and follow Me," that thou mayest no longer lie in the earth, but 
mayest ascend to the heavens. Indeed, it was necessary that when 
the Saviour rose, Adam, and all the seed of Adam, should rise with 
him. — (Migne, Patrologia Groeca, xxviii, col. 208.) 

3. Epiphanius, Adversus Haereses (lib. 1, torn, iii, xlvi, 5). — Where- 
fore a man of understandmg may wonder that, as we have been 
taught by the Scriptures, Our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified at 
Golgotha, in no other place than that in which Adam lay buried. For 
Adam, when he was cast out of Paiadise, dwelt for a long time over 
against it. Then a long time afterwards he removed to the place 
Jerusalem, of which I have spoken, and there, when he died, he was 
buried in Golgotha. From this the place itself has rightly received 
its name, so that when interpreted it may be called the Place of a 
Skull. There is nothing to be seen in the place resembling this 
name ; for it is not situated upon a height that it should be called 
[the Place] of a Skull, answering to the place of the head in the 
human body ; neither has it the shape of a lofty watch-tower, for it 
does not even rise above the places round about it (o^ev, etieoroff to 
€Tro»wfiov 6 ronos ^(TX^y upovlov dpfirjvtvojjitvos ronos, ^s opofiaaias to frxoyua 
Tov Tonov €p.(f)ip€iav Tiva ovx vitohelKWVLv • ovt€ yap iv oKpa Tivl Kevrcu, ipa 
Kpaviov TovTO €pfirjv€vr}Tai, cis ini troifAaTos K€<l){iK^ tottos Xeycrat, otVc 
(TKOTTias ' Koi yap oUtc iv vyjfei KcTrai irapa Toifs aWovs tottovs). Indeed, 
over against it stands the Mount of Olives, which is a higher hill than 
it : but the highest is the mountain of Gibeon, which stands eight 
miles away from it. Lastly, even that hill which once stood on 
Mount Sion, but at the present day has been cut down, was higher 
than Golgotha on that spot. Whence, then, did it obtain the name of 
the Place of a Skull ? No doubt because there the bare skull of the 
first man was discovered and his remains dug up ; for this cause it was 
called the Place of a Skull. In this place our Lord Jesus Christ was 
lifted up on the Cross, and by the water and blood which flowed from 
his pierced side typified the whole scheme of our salvation . . . . — 
(Migne, Patrologia Orcecay xli, col. 844.) 

4. Basil (of Cesarea), Commentary/ on Isaiah v, § 141. — There 
was a prevalent belief, preserved in the Church by an unwritten 
tradition, to the effect that Adam was the first inhabitant of Palestine, 
who fixed his abode there after he had been driven out of Paradise 
(Gen. iii, 23), that he might compensate himself for the good things 
which he had lost. This land therefore received the first man who 
died, for it was there that Adam paid his debt. Wherefore the bone 
of his skull, when bared of flesh, appeared as a new and strange 
sight to the men of that age. Now, as they placed his skull in this 


place, they called the place itself the Place of a Skull (#eat dvodcfievoi 
t6 Kpaviov iv r^ ront^, Kpaviov tokov mv6fia(rav). It is probable that this 
sepulchre (t6v ra^oi') of the first of all men was well known, so that 
after the flood this tradition about it was prevalent. For this cause 
the Lord, perceiving there the first fruits of human death, Himself 
suffered death in the place called the Place of a Skull, to the end 
that at the place where men's death first began there also life should 
begin its reign, so that as death had dominion over Adam, so by 
the death of Christ he should lose his power (1 Cor. xv, 22).— (Migne, 
Patrologia Grceca^ xxx, col. 348.) 

5. Chrysostom, Commentary on St. John, xix, 16-18 ; Hom.^ 85. — 
" And he came to the place of a skull. Some say that Adam died there, 
and there lieth ; and that Jesus in this place where death had reigned, 
there also set up the trophy" {i.e., the Cross). — (Migne, Patrologia 
Grceca, lix, col. 459 ; Pusey, Chrysostom, ii, 756.) 

6. NoNNUS Panopolitanus, Paraphrase of St. John, xix. — 

and Jesus bearing his cross. 
Willingly went on his way, undaunted in mind, to his doom, 
Till he arrived at the place which is called the Place of a Skull, 
Bearing the name on its brow of Adam the first of men, 
Golgotha called in the Syrian tongue. • 

— (Migne, Patrologia Grceca, xliii, col. 901.) 

7. Basil (of Seleucia), Oration xxxviii, 3. — According to the tradi- 
tions of the Jews, it is said that the skull of Adam was found here, 
and that this was known to Solomon through his great wisdom. This, 
they say, is the reason why this place was called "the Place of a 
Skull." — (Migne, Patrologia Orceca, Ixxxv, col. 409.) 

8. Tertullian, Adversus MarcioTiem, lib. ii, cap. 4. — 

There is a place, now Golgotha, once Calvary, 
Place of a Skull named in the earlier tongue ; 
Here is earth's centre, here was victory won ; 
Here, ancients say, was found a mighty head. 
Here, we have heard, the first man lay entombed ; 
Christ suffered here, his blood bedewed the earth. 
So that old Adam's dust, with blood of Christ 
Commingled, by that saving flood might rise. 

(Appendix I. to the genuine works of Tertullian.) — (Migne, Patro- 
logia Latina, ii, col. 1,067.) 

9. i. CrpRiAN, Ad Cornelium Papam de Cardinalibu^ Operihus 
Christi, " De Resurrectione Christi." — Nor is it right that in these 



days we should speak of sad things, but as it was appointed to the 
children of love (1 Chron. vi, 31-33) that they should ever sing and 
prophesy merrily, and all the Psalms which bear their names tell of 
joy, and threaten no evil, so we who belong to Christ, with whose 
blood we believe that Adam's skull was sprinkled, as ancient tradition 
tells us that he was buried beneath the place whereon the Lord's cross 
was set up, being sanctified by the flowing of his blood, let us make 
merry and rejoice in the Lord. — (S. Caecilii Cypriani Ep. Carthagi- 
nensis et Mart. Opera, ed. Baluzius, p. 133.) 

9. ii. Hymnm Victorini Pictaviensis, De Cruce Domini. — (Wrongly 
ascribed to Cyprian.) There is a place which we believe to be the 
middle of the whole earth. The Jews call it in their own language 
Golgotha (op. cit., ed. Baluzius, p. 159). 

N.B. — These two passages are in the editions of Baluze, and of 
Oxford, but not in Migne, who does not accept them as 

10. i. Ambrose, Epist, 71, § 10. To Horontianus. — There (at 
Golgotha) was the sepulchre of Adam ; that Christ by his Cross might 
raise him from death. Thus, where in Adam was the death of all, 
there in Christ was the resurrection of all. — (Migne, Pairologia 
LcUinay xvi, col. 1,243 ; Pusey, Library of the Fathers^ Epistles of St. 

10. ii. Exposition of St, Lukes Gospel, lib. x. — The place of the cross 
was either in the midst, that it might be easily seen of all ; or above 
the burial place of Adam, according to the Hebrews. Indeed it was 
fitting that our spiritual life should have its beginning in the place 
wherein death first came into the world. — (Migne, Patrologia Latina, 
XV, col. 1,832, § 114.) 

1 1. i. Jerome, Epistola Paulce et Eustochii ad Marcellam (Ep. 46 (17), 
written about a.d. 386). — § 3. Finally, to refer to an entirely different 
subject, let us go back to more ancient times. In this city, nay, in this 
very place, Adam is said to have dwelt there, and to have died there. 
Whence the place wherein Our Lord was crucified was called Calva/ry, 
because it was there that the ancient man's skull was buried, to the 
end that the second Adam, that is to say, the blood of Christ flowing 
from the Cross, might wash away the sins of Adam the first and first- 
formed man who lay there ; and that then the words of the apostle 
might be fulfilled, "Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the 
dead, and Christ shall give thee light" (Ephes. v, 14). — (Migne, 
Patrologia Latina^ xxii, col. 485.) 

11. ii. Commentary on the Ephesians, v, 14. — I remember to have 


heard someone discoursing in church upon this passage, and he tried 
to please the people by telling them of a stage miracle, a matter never 
heard of before, saying, "This testimony applies to Adam who was 
buried in the place Calvary, where the Lord was crucified. This place 
was called Calvary, because the head of the ancient man was buried 
there ; when, therefore, at the time when the Lord was crucified, he 
hung over his sepulchre [lit. at that time, therefore, when the Lord 
on his Cross was hanging over his (Adam's) sepulchre], this prophecy 
was fulfilled which saith, * Arise, Adam, thou that sleepest, and arise 
from the deAd.' " — (Migne, Patrologia Latina^ xxvi, col. 626.) 

11. iii. Commentary on St, Matthew, xxvii, 33. — I have heard some- 
one explain that the place Calvary, in which Adam was buried, was so 
named because there the head of the ancient man was placed, and that 
this was what was meant by the apostle when he said, " Awake, thou 
that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee 
light." This is a popular interpretation and pleasing to the ears of the 
people, but nevertheless it is not a true one, for outside the city and 
without the gate there are places wherein the heads of condemned 
criminals are cut ofl', and which have obtained the name of Calvary, 
that is, of the beheaded. For this reason the Lord was crucified 
there, in order that the banner of his martyrdom might be set up in 
the place which had before been the field of the condemned. And as 
for us he bore the reproach of the cross, was scourged and crucified, 
even so for the salvation of all men he was crucified as a criminal 
among criminals. But if anyone should argue that the Lord was 
crucified on that spot to the end that his blood might run down on 
to the tomb of Adam, let us ask him why the two thieves were 
crucified in the same place? From this it is evident that Calvary 
does not mean the sepulchre of the first man, but the place of the 
beheaded, and that where sin abounded, grace might much more 
abound (Romans v, 20). Now we read in the Book of Joshua (xiv, 16),* 
the son of Nun, that Adam was buried at Hebron, which is Arba. — 
(Migne, Patrologia Latina, xxv, col. 209.) 

11. iv. Onomasticon, Art. ^^Arboc.^* — Arboc . . . that is four, because 
three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are buried there, and 
great Adam, as is written in the Book of Joshua (xiv, 15), though some 
think that he was buried in the Place of a Skull. — (Migne, Patrologia 
Latina, xxiii, col. 862). — [Translated by C. W. W.] 

^ This well-known error of Jerome's, which also occurs in the 
Onomasticon, Art. " Arboc," is due to a misreading of the Hebrew text of 
Josh, xiv, 15. Jerome has ^*Adam maximus ibi inter Enaeim situs est*' 
(Migne, Patrologia Latina^ xxviii, col. 488), where the Bevised Version 
reads, " which Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim." 

L 2 


12. Augustine, torn, v, Sermones Supposititii^ Semio vi (Ixxi). — § 6. 
Hear also another mystery. St. Jerome, the Elder of the Church, 
has recorded {on Marh^ xv) that he learned for a truth from the 
ancients and the older Jews, that Isaac was offered at the place where 

the Lord Christ was afterwards crucified It has also been 

handed down by ancient tradition that the first man Adam was buried 
on the very spot where the cross was set up, and that place was there- 
fore called Calvary, because the head of the human race is said to have 
been buried there. And this belief, my brethren, is not unreasonable, 
for the physician is raised up on the place where the sick man lay 
down. It was light also that the divine pity should bow itself down 
on the spot where human pride had fallen, and that we should believe 
that while that precious blood actually deigned to fall upon the dust 
of the ancient and sinful man, it should have wrought his redemption. 
— (Migne, Patrologia Latina, xxxix, col. 1,751.) 

13. Moses Bar Cepha, De Paradiso, i, cap. 14.— Adam, after the 
loss of Paradise, first lived in Judsea, and, after he had travelled in 
many countries and dwelt in many places, came towards the end of 
his days to Mount Jebus, and was buried there. Now, Jebus is 

certainly Jerusalem [When Noah at the approach of the 

Deluge entered the ark with his sons], he took the bones of Adam 
with him, and when he left the ark after the Flood he distributed the 
bones amongst his sons. He also parted the world amongst them, 
giving to each his portion to dwell in. Thus he gave Adam's skull 
to his eldest son, Shem, and allotted to him the land of Judaea ; and 
so it happened that Shem, when he came to Judaea (his inheritance), 
reburied the skull of Adam, which he had received at the distri 
bution of the bones by his father, at the sepulchre of Adam, which 

was then in existence If that be the case, then it is true that 

the skull of Adam was buried at Jebus, i.e., Jerusalem, and that the 
cross of Christ was set up above it. It is also certain that Noah brought 
with him the bones of Adam from that other land, and that when he 
came into this our country, he gave the head to his firstborn, Shem, 
who, when he came to Jebus, his inheritance, buried it. — (Migne, 
Patrologia Grceca, cxi, cols. 497, 498). — [Translated by C. W. W.] 

14. EuTTCHius, Amiales, p. 19. — Adam, when he felt that he was 
about to die, called together his son Seth, and Enosh, the son of Seth, 
and Kenan, the son of Enosh, and Mahalalel the son of Kenan, and 
taught them what they should do, saying to them : — Let this be a law 
for all your children. When I am dead, embalm my body with myrrh 
aloes, and cassia, and lay it in the cave el-Kanitz : and whosoever of 
your sons shall be living at the time when you determine to leave the 


confines of Paradise, let him bear my body with him and bury it in 
the middle of the earth, for from thence shall come my salvation and 
the salvation of all my children. .... So when Adam died, his son 
Seth embalmed his body, acjcording to his command, bore it to the top 
of the Mount, and buried it in the cave el-KarvAz 

P. 44. --[Noah, when at the point of death, thus instructed Shem.] 
See that thou take Adam's body out of the ark, unknown to everyone, 
and then take store of bread and wine for a journey and set forth, and 
take with you Melchizedek, the son of Peleg, and lay the body in the 

place which the angel of the Lord shall show you The angel 

of the Lord shall go before you until you come to the place where you 
are to bury Adam, and you may know that spot to be the middle of 
the earth 

P. 48. So Shem did as his father Noah commanded him ; he went 
into the ark by night and bore thence the body of Adam, telling no 

man what he was doing Now when Shem and Melchizedek, 

bearing with them Adam's body, set forth on their way, the angel of 
the Lord met them, and never departed from them until he had 
brought them to the midst of the earth and shown them the place. 
When Adam's body was laid upon it, it opened of its own accord, and 
then, when the body was within it, it closed up again. Now the name 
of this place isel-Jaljalah,— (Migne,Fatrologia Gr<xca,cx\, cols. 911, 
917,- 918.) 

15. Maimonides, in Beit Ahachria^ cap. 2. — The site of the altar 
was conveniently situated, and its position was never changed, as it is 
written, "this is the burnt offering of Israel" (1 Chron. xxii, 1). In 
the place of the sanctuary our father Isaac was bound, according to 
the command, " get thee into the land of Moriah " (Gen. xxii, 2). It is 
also said that Solomon built the house [of the Lord] there, on the 
mount (1 Kings vi, 14). Now, it is a common tradition (tradiHo in 
omnium manu) that the place in which David and Solomon built a 
resting place for the Ark was the same spot as that upon which 
Abraham built an altar and bound Isaac upon it. It was also the 
place upon which Noah built an altar after he left the ark ; and this 
was the same altar upon which Cain, Abel, and Adam, after his 
creation, offered a first sacrifice, and from the dust of that spot Adam 
was fonned. Hence the wise ones say, Adam was created from the 
place of his atonement (e loco expiationis suae). (From Fabricius, 
Codex Fseiidepigraphus Vet. Test.^ 2nd ed., vol. i, cap. 29, p. 73.)— 
[Translated by C. W. AV.] 

16. Cyril (of Jerusalem), Catechetical Lectures, xiii, 23. — Now, 
Golgotha is interpreted " the Place of a Skull." Who were they, then, 


who prophetically named this Golgotha, in which Christ the true Head 
endured the cross ? As the apostle says, " who is the image of the 
invisible God " (Col. i, 15) ; and, after a little, " and He is the Head of 
the body, the Church " (Col. i, 18) ; and again, " the Head of every 
man is Christ" (1 Cor. xi, 3) ; and again, "who is the Head of all 
principality and power " (Col. ii, 10). The Head suflfered in the " Place 
of the Skull." O wondrous prophetic adaptation ! The very name 
almost reminds thee, saying : Think not of the Crucitied as of a mere 
man ; He is the Head of all prindpality and power. That Head 
which was crucified is the Head of all j)ower, and has for His Head 
the Father ; for the Head of the man is Chnst, and the Head of Christ 
is God (1 Cor. xi, 3.) — (Migne, Patrologia Grasca, xxiii, cols. 800, 801 ; 
Pusey, Library of the Fathers^ Cyril's Catechetical Lectures.) 

17. Ven. Bbde, on St. Matthew xxvii. — And when they were come 
unto a place called Golgotha. — Now Golgotha is a Syrian word, and is, 
being interpreted, a place of a skull (Calvarice). This place is in jElia 
(Jei'usalem), and was at that time without the city, on the northern 
side of Mount Sion, and was called the ])lace of Calvary, not because 
of the baldness {calvicium) of the first man, whom some in eiTor do 
vainly suppose to have been buried there, but because of the beheading 
of criminals and men condemned to die. For this reason the Lord 
was crucified there, in order that the standard of his martyrdom 
might be set up on the spot which heretofore had been the place of 
execution of the condemned. — (Migne, Patrologia Grceca^ xcii, 
col. 123.) 

18. According to Quaresmius {Elucidatio Ten^a SanctcBy ii, 446a, 
ch. 38), who interpolates words to help out his iambic lines, Gregory 
Nazianzen writes in his Christiis Patiens : — 

" * When the impious crowd, dragging with it my King, had left 
the city of the Solymi, and had come to a loftj' spot strewn with 
many rocks. . . .' 

" And further on : — 

*' ' So when, standing on a spot raised on a mound of rocks, they 
had nailed the Lord of all upon the tall cross,' &c." 

The original of Gregory (Christus Patiens^ lines 657-666), reads :— 

** When the impious crowd, leaving the city of the Solymi and 
dragging along my Lord with it, came to the Pavement {is 2r/j<k>rovs 

AiBovs) And when they had thus hung up the Lord, some of 

them struck him on the head with a reed, mounting upon a tower- 
like (avTinvfyyov) rock." — (Migne, Patrologia Groeca, xxxviii, col. 189.) 



Extracts from Greek and Latin Writers relating to 
THE History of Jerusalem, a.d. 33-326. 

1. Roman Procurators frmn a.d. 6 to a.d. 66. 

Pbooubatoes. BEiGhNiNGh Emfebobs 

Coponius. From a.d. 6 to a.d. 9 or 10. Augustus, 

d. 19th Aug., 14. 

Marcus Ambivius. From a.d. 9 or 10 to a.d. 12 or 13. 

Annius Rufus. From a.d. 12 or 13 to a.d. 14 Tiberius, 

or 15. d, 16th March, 37. 

Valerius Gratus. From a.d. 14 or 15 to a.d. 25 or 26. 

Pontius Pilatus. From a.d. 25 or 26 to a.d. 35 or 36. 

Marcellus. From a.d. 35 or 36 to a.d. 37. Caligula, 

d. 24th Jan., 41. 

Murullus. From a.d. 37 to a. d. 41. 

Herod Agrippa I, King. From a.d. 41 to a.d. 44. Claudius, 

d. 13th Oct., 54. 

Cuspius Fadus. From a.d. 44 to A.D. 46. 

Tiberius Alexander. From a.d. 46 to a.d. 48. 

Ventidius Cumanus. From a.d. 48 to a.d. 52, 

Claudius, or Antoninus, Felix. From a.d. 52 to Nero, 

A.D. 60. A.D. 54 to 68. 

Porcius Festus. From a.d. 60 to a.d. 61. 

Albinus. From a.d. 62 to a.d. 64. 

Gessius Floras. From a.d. 64 to a.d. QQ. 

2. The known governors are : Sextus Vettulenus Cerealis, who 
was given the command when Titus left ; Lucilius Bassus, who 
took the Herodium and Machaerus, and died in office ; L. Flavins 
Silvia Nonius Bassus, who took Masada ; M. Salvidenus, circa a.d. 80 ; 
Cn. Pompeius Longinus, a.d. 86 ; Atticus, circa a.d. 107, under whose 
rule Simeon, son of Clopas, was martyred ; Pompeius Falco, circa 
A.D. 107-110, with whom Pliny the Younger corresponded ; Tiberianus, 
drca A.D. 114 ; Lusius Quietus, who suppressed an incipient rising in 


the fii*8t year of Hadrian ; Tineiiis Rufus, a.d. 132, who was governor 
when the revolt under Bar Kokba broke out ; and Julius Severus, a.d. 
135, who was sent from Biitain and suppressed the rebellion. (See 
Schlirer, History of the Jeicish People, Div. I., vol. ii, p. 258, ff., English 
Edition, where fuller information is given.) 

3. Appian, History of Rome, " Syria," chap L— Pompey forcibly 
overthrew the revolted nation of the Jews, sent their King Aristo- 
bulus to Rome, and devastated their greatest and holiest city, Jerusalem. 
This city had already been taken by Ptolemy I., King of Egypt, and, 
after it had been rebuilt, was again destroyed by Vespasian, and 
finally in our own time by Hadrian. For this reason the taxes which 
the Jews pay per head are heavier in proportion than those of the 
neighbouring nations. For the Syrians and Cilicians also pay an 
annuiil tribute per head, a hundreth of their rateable property. — (Ed, L. 
Mendelssohn, vol. i, p. 420.) 

4. i. Dion Cassius {History of Rome, Ixvi, 7). — From that time (the 
destruction of Jerusalem by Titus) every Jew who adhered to* the 
laws of his forefathei's was obliged to pay two drachmae each year to 
the Capitoline Jupiter (t© KaTrtrcoXt^ Au). 

4. ii. i7nV/., Ixix, \± — The foundation of a colony at Jerusalem, to 
which he (Hadrian) gave the name ^lia Capitolina, in place of the city 
that had been overthrown ; and the erection of a new temple to Jupiter 
on the site of the Temple of God gave rise to a long and terrible war. 
The Jews, irritated at seeing foreigners living in their city, and 
establishing in it sacrifices different to their own, remained quiet as 
long as Hadrian was in Egypt, and after he had returned to Syria^ 
.... but directly the Emperor had left that country they rose in 
open revolt. They did not dare to face the Romans in a pitched battle^ 
but seized favourable positions and fortified them with walls and 
underground passages .... 

4. iii. Ihid., Ixix, 13. — The Romans at first took no notice of what 
the Jews were doing. But when the movement spread over all Judsea 
.... and several foreign communities .... had taken up the cause 
of the rebels .... Hadrian sent against them his best generals. 
The most eminent of these was Julius Severus, who was recalled from 
Britain, where he was in command, that he might be entrusted with 
the conduct of the war against the Jews .... 

4. iv. Ibid., Ixix, 14. — ^Fifty of their fortified places and 955 of 
their open towns and villages were destroyed ; 180,000 men were killed ; 
those who perished by famine and fire were io numerable, so that nearly 
the whole of Judtea was nothing but a desert, as had been foretold to 
them before the war. The monument of Solomon {to fivrffietop roB 


26kofAS>vTos), which the Jews had held in high esteem, fell of its own 
accord and broke up. Large numbers of wolves and hyaenas burst 
into the towns with howls. — (From the French translation of 
MM. Gros and Boisse6.) 

5. ^Lius Spartianus (On Hadrian, xiii). — About this time the 
Jews revolted because they were not allowed to practise the rite of 

6. i. Tertullian, Apologia, 21. — Scattered abroad and wanderers, 
exiled from their own climate and soil, they roam about the world 
without any man or God to rule them, and are not even allowed to 
greet their own country by treading its ground as a stranger. — 
(Migne, Patrologia Latina, i, coL 394.) 

6. ii. Adversits Judceos, cap. 13. — Now we know that at this time 
none of the seed of Israel is left in the city of Bethlehem, because it is 
forbidden that any Jew should dwell in the region round about that 
spot .... that for your deserts after the taking of Jerusalem, when 
you have been forbidden to ent*»r your fatherland, and are only 
sujffered to view it from afar with your eyes. — (Migne, Ihid., ii, 
cols. 633, 634.) 

7. i. Justin Martyr, Apologia, i, 31. — For in the late Jewish war 
Barchochebas, the leader of the Jewish revolt, ordered the Christians 
alone to be put to grievous tortures if they refused to deny Jesus 
Christ and utter blasphemy. — (Migne, Patrologia Grceca, vi, cols. 376, 

7. ii. Ihid. 47. — And that Jerusalem was laid waste, as it was 
prophesied (Isaiah i, 7) should come to pass, ye know well. And 
ye are well aware that with regard to its desolation, and that none of 
its people may return to dwell therein, Jerusalem is watched over by 
you in order that no one may enter into it, and death has been 
ordaiaed as the penalty for any Jew that may be caught entering 
into it.— (Ilnd., col. 400.) 

7. iii. Dialog, cum Tryphon, cap. 16. — Now this cii'cumcision which 
was enjoined upon Abraham according to the flesh, was given as a 
sign, that ye should be set apart from us and from other nations, and 
that ye alone should suffer those things which ye do now deservedly 
suffer ; and that your countries should be laid waste, and your cities 
])urned with fire, and strangers shall devour your land in your 
presence, and none of you shall go up to Jerusalem. — {Ibid., col. 510.) 

7. iv. Ibid., cap. 52. — Moreover he put an end to the rule of your 
own kings over you, and furthermore your land is become desolate, 
and is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of 
cucumbers. — {Ibid., col. 592.) 


8. i. EusEBius, Ecdesiastical History^ ii, 23. — James was so admir- 
able a raau, and so celebrated amoug all for his justice, that the more 
sensible even of the Jews were of opiniou that this was the cause 
of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately after 
his martyrdom, for no other reason than their daring act against 
him. . . . And they buried him on the spot, by the Temple, and 
his monumeut (an^Xiy) still remains by the Temple. — (Migne, Patro- 
logia Grcst'Oy xx, col. 204) 

8. ii. Ihid., iii, 5. — But the people of the Church in Jerusalem 
had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men 
there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town 
of Perea, called Pella. — {Ibid,, col. 221.) 

8. iii. Ihid.y iii, 11. — After the martyrdom of James, and the 

conquest of Jerusalem which immediately followed They all 

with one consent pronounced Simeon, the son of Clopas, of whom 
the Gospel also makes mention, to be worthy of the Episcopal throne 
of that parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour, — {Jbid., 
col. 245.) 

8. iv. Ihu/.f iv, 22. — According to Hegesippus, " After James the 
Just had suflfered martyrdom, as the Lord had also on the same 
account, Simeon, the son of the Lord's uncle, Clopas, was appointed 
the next bishop. All proposed him as second bishop because he was 
a cousin of the Lord." — {Ibid,^ col. 380.) 

8. V. Ibid., iii, 12. — Hegesippus "relates that Vespasian, after 
the conquest of Jerusalem, gave orders that all that belonged to the 
lineage of David should be sought out, in order that none of the 
royal race might be left among the Jews." 

8. vi. Ibid.y iii, 19. — When this same Domitian had commanded that 
the descendants of David should be slain, an ancient tradition says 
that some of the heretics brought accusation against the descendants 
of Jude (said to have been a brother of the Saviour according to the 
flesh) on the ground that they were of the lineage of David, and were 
related to Christ himself. 

8. vii. Ibid., iii, 20. — Hegesippus relates, " Of the family of the Lord 
there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have 
been the Lord's brother according to the flesh. Information was given 
that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to 
the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian feared the 
coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it." Domitian, on learning 
tliat they were poor men, living on a small property, which they 
tilled with their own hands, dismissed them. " But when they were 
released they ruled the Churches, because they were witnesses 
(fidprvpts), and were also relatives of the Lord. And peace being 
established, they lived until the time of Hadrian. — (Ibid., col. 281.) 


8. viii. /6tc?., iii, 32. — Hegesippus writes : "Certain of these heretics 
brought accusation against Simeon, the son of Clopa6,^on the ground 
that he was the descendant of David and a Christian ; and thus he 
suffered martyrdom at the age of one hundred and twenty years 
while Trajan was Emperor and Atlicus Governor." And the same 
writer says that his accusers also, when search was made for the 

descendants of David, were arrested as belonging to that family 

The same historian savs that there were also others, descended from 
one of the so-called brothers of the Saviour, whose name was Judas, 
who, after they had borne testimony before Domitian, as has already 
been recorded, in behalf of faith in Christ, lived until the same reign. 
He writes as follows : — " They came, therefore, and took the lead of 
every Church as witnesses (fnSpTvp€s) and as relatives of the Lord. 
And profound peace being established in every church, they remained 
until the reign of the Emperor Trajan .... and orders were given 
that he (Simeon) should be crucified." — (Ihid.^ col. 284.) 

8. ix. Ibid., iv, 5.- -The chronology of the bishops of Jerusalem 
I have nowhere found preserved in writing ; for tradition says that 
they were all short-lived. But I have learned this much from 
writings ^ (roaovrov 8Vf cyypa^o)!/ frapciXi^^a), that until the siege of the 
Jews, which took place under Hadrian, there were 15 bishops in succes- 
sion there, all of whom are said to have been of Hebrew descent 

For their whole Church consisted then of believing Hebrews who 
continued from the days of the Apostles until the siege, which took 
place at this time ; in which siege the Jews, having again rebelled 
against the Komans, were conquered after severe battles. — (Ibid., 
col. 309.) 

8. X. Ibid., iv, 6. — The whole nation was prohibited from this 
time on (the capture of Bether), by the commands of Hadrian, from 
ever going up to the country about Jerusalem. For the Emperor gave 
orders that they should not even see from a distance the land of their 

fathers And thus, when the city had been emptied of the 

Jewish nation, and had suffered the total destruction of its ancient 

inhabitants, it. was colonized by a different race And as the 

Church there was now composed of Gentiles, the first one to assume 
the government of it, after the bishops of the circumcision, was Marcus. 
— (Migne, Ibid.y cols. 312, 313 ; tr. in Niceneand Post-Nicene Fathers.) 

8. xi. Demonstratio Evangelica, vi, 18. — At that time (the capture 
of Jerusalem by Titus) it is probable that half the city perished 
according to the prophecy ; and not long afterwards, in the days of 

** Cf. Demonstratio Evangelica, iii, 5. The first bishops that presided 
there are said to have been Jews, and their names are preserved by the 
inhabitants of the country. 


the Emperor Hadrian, wheu the Jews revolted a second time, the 
other lialf of the city was besieged and (its people) driven away, even 
as they had been from the other half, and to this day none of them are 
suffered to enter it. — (Migne, Patrologia O rosea, xxii, cols. 453, 454.) 

8. xii. Demotist ratio Evatigelwa, vi, 18.— This Mount of Olives is said 
to stand over against Jerusalem, that is, answering to it, because God 
established it in the place of the earthly Jerusalem, and of the services 

which used to be held there, after the destruction of Jerusalem 

This we may see, from another point of view, fulfilled to the letter even 
to this day, when all believers in Christ flock together from all quarters 
of the earth, not as of old to behold the beauty of Jerusalem, or that they 
may worship in the former Temple which stood in Jerusalem, but that 
they may abide there, and both hear the story of Jerusalem and also 
worship in the Mount of Olives over against Jerusalem, whither the 
glory of the Lord removed itself, leaving the earlier city. There also> 
according to the published record, the feet of our Lord and Saviour, 
Who was Himself the Word, and, through it, took upon Himself 
human form, stood upon the Mount of Olives, near the cave which 
is now pointed out there. There He prayed, and on the top of the 
Mount of Olives communicated the mysteries of the Christian covenant, 
and from thence also He ascended into heaven, b» we are taught by 
Luke in the Acts of the Apostles. — (Ibid.y xxii, col. 457, 458.) 

8. xiii. Ibid., viii, 3. — "Therefore shall Sion for your sake 
be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps" 
(Micah iii, 12), which prophecy was never truly fulfilled at any time 
except after they dared to do violence to our Saviour. From that 
time to this present day these places have lain utterly desolate, and 
the Mount Sion, which once was the most famous of them all — Id stead 
of the ancient meditations and practice of the prophetic and divine 
oracles which aforetime were set forth in that place with great zeal 
by Hebrews, men who walked with God, prophets, priests, and rulers 
of the whole nation — now differs in nothing from the country round 
about it, and is ploughed and tilled by Komans, and we ourselves have 
seen the labour of the oxen and the crops. . . . For Jerusalem, being 
inhabited by strangers, even at this day furnishes stones to those who 
gather them, seeing that all those who in our own time dwell therein 
collect stones from her ruins, both from private and from public build- 
ings, and we may see with our eyes the saddest of all sights — stones being 
taken from the Temple itself, and from what once was the Holy of 
Holies itself (roifs c^ alrov tov Upov Koi avrav t5>v ahvTcov Ka\ ayitov 
\i6ovi)y to build shi-ines for idols and places for shows, where all the 
people may assemble. These things being beheld by all men, clearly 
prove that the New Law and the New Testament instituted by our 
Saviour Jesus Christ has departed from thence.— (i&i'o?., col. 636.) 


8. XIV. Theophania, iv, 20. — We can easily see with our own 
eyes how the Jews are dispersed into all nations ; and how the 
inhabitants of that which was formerly Jerusalem, but is now named 
^lia by ^lius Hadrian, are foreigners, and the descendants of 
another race. ... It is only their own city, and the place in which 
their worship formerly was (carried on) that they cannot enter ! . . . . 
Now, however, that the place is inhabited by foreigners, the 
descendants of a different race, and it is not allowed to them alone 
even to set a foot in it, so that they cannot view even from a distance 
the land of their forefathers, the things foretold of it are fulfilled.-— 
{Lee's translation, p. 252.) 

8. XV. Chronicle. — From whence they are shut out, and may not 
enter any part of the city, by the ordinance of God, and the might 
of the Romans. — (Migne, Patrologia Grceca^ xix, cols. 557, 558.) 

9. i. Epiphanius, De Mensuris et Pondibus, xiv. — He (Hadrian) 
came to the city of Antioch, crossed Coelo Syria and Phoenicia, and 
came into £he country of Palestine, which is also called Judsea, in the 
forty -seventh year since the ruin of Jerusalem. He arrived at the 
most famous and noble city of Jerusalem, which was laid waste 
by Titus, the son of Vespasian, in the second year of his reign. He 
found tlie whole city razed to the ground, and the Temple of the 
Lord trodden under foot, there being only a few houses standing, and 
the Church of God, a small building, on the place where the disciples 
on their return from the Mount of Olives, after the Saviour's 
Ascension, assembled in the upper chamber. This was built in the 
part of Sion which had escaped destruction, together with some 
buildings round about Sion, and seven synagogues that stood alone 
in Sion like cottages, one of which remained standing down to the 
time of Bishop Maximus and the Emperor Constantine, "like a lodge 
in a garden of cucumbers," in the words (»f Scripture. Now, Hadrian 
meditated the restoration of the city, but not of the Temple. He 
appointed the aforesaid Aquila to superintend the works connected 
with the building of the city. He gave the city his own name and 
the use of the imperial title ; for as he was named ^lius Hadrianus, 
he named the city ^lia. — (Migne, Patrologia Grceca^ xliii, col. 259.) 

9. ii. Ihid., xv. — Now Aquila dwelt at Jerusalem, and beheld the 
disciples of those who had been taught by the apostles, full of faith 
and working great miracles both in healing and otherwise. By this 
time, indeed, they had returned to Jerusalem from Pella, and were 
teaching there ; for, when the city was about to be taken by the 
B.omans, all the disciples were warned by an angel to depart from the 
city, as it was about to be utterly destroyed. They therefore left their 
home and sojourned in the aforesaid city of Pella beyond Jordan, 


which is I'eckoiie*! one of the cities of Decapolis. After the destraction- 
of Jerusalem, they came back, as I have already told, and wrought 
mighty works. — (Migne, Patrologia Groeca, xliii, col. 262.) 


10. The Bordeaux Pilgrim. — And in the building (in cede) itself, 
where stoo<l the Temple which Solomon built .... there are two 
statues of Hadrian, and not far fi'om the statues there is a perforated 
stone to which the Jews come every year and anoint it, bewail them- 
selves with groans, rend their garments, and so depart. — {Itinerarif 
from Boi'deattx to Je)'usalem, in Palestine Pilgrims* Texts, vol. i.) 

11. 1. Jerome, Commentary on Zachariah xiv, 2. — These things 
were also told by Cornelius Tacitus, who wrote the lives of the Caesars 
from the times of Augustus down to the death of Domitian. Now as 
to the middle part of the city being taken, and the rest of the citizens 
suffered to remain in the city, it has been proved that both on that 
and on other occasions the northern and lower part of the city has 
been taken, and yet that the hill of the Temple, and Sion whereon was 
the citadel, remained inviolate. — (Migne, Patrologia Latina, xxv, 
col. 1,622.) 

11. ii. Commentary on Daniel ix. — After his death, when seven 
weeks, that is 49 years have passed, ^^lius Hadrianus, he by whom 
the city of ^^lia will subsequently be founded on the ruins of Jeru- 
salem, will subdue the rebellious Jews, Timus Eufus leading the 
(Roman) army. — {Ibid., col. 552.) 

11. iii. Commentary 0^1 Zachariah Y\\i,\Sy\^. — The city of Bethel 
(Bether), whither many thousands of Jews had fled for refuge, was 
taken ; the Temple was levelled with the ground {aratum Templum, 
lit. the site of the Temple was ploughed up) as an insult to the con- 
quered race by Titus Annius Rufus (or Turannius Rufus). — (Ibid., 
col. 1,475.) 

11. iv. Commentary on Ezekiel v, 1. — The city was taken and the 
Temple overthrown in the time of Titus and Vespasian. Fifty years 
afterwards, in Hadrian's time, the city was burned to the ground 
and blotted out, insomuch that it lost even its original name. — 
(/6i^.,col. 52.) 

11. V. Commentary on Hahakkuk ii. — They fainted through hunger 
and want, and Hadrian's siege brought them to utter iniin. Now when 
the city of blood, the town of iniquity, was overthrown, and its 
inhabitants burned with fire, and the nations who had come to their 
aid dispersed hither and thither. — (Ihid.y col. 1,299.) 

11. vi. Commentary on Jeremiah xxxi, 15. — It was in the last 
captivity in Hadrian's time, when the city of Jerusalem was over- 
thrown, and a countless number of people of all ages and both sexes 


were sold for slaves in the market place of the Terebinth {in mercato 
Terebinthi) : wherefore that famous market is an abomination to the 
Jews. — (Migne, Patrologia LaiiiWL^ xxiv, col. 877.) 

11. vii. Commentary on Zachariahni^ A, — Let us read the ancient 
histories and the traditions of the wailing of the Jews, how that at 
the place of Abraham's tent (where now every year a very well- 
frequented market is held), after their final overthrow by Hadrian, 
many thousands were sold as slaves, and those who could not be 
sold were sent to Egypt and cut off by shipwreck and famine, as well 
as by their slaughter by the Gentiles.— (Migne, Patrologia Latina^ 
XXV, cols. 1,500, 1,501.) 

11. viii. Commentary on Isaiah ii, 9. — Where once was the Temple 
and the religion of God, there now stands the statue of Hadrian and 
the idol Jupiter. — (Migne, Patrologia Latina^ xxiv, col. 49.) 

11. ix. Commentary on St. Matthew xxiv^, 15. — This may either be 
taken simply to refer to A.ntichrist, or to the statue of Caesar which 
Pilate set up in the Temple, or to the equestrian statue of Hadrian, 
which has stood even to the present day in the Holy of Holies itself. 
— (Migne, Patrologia Latina, xxvi. col. 177.) 

11. X. Commentary on Zephaniah i, 15. — They who once bought 
the blood of Christ, let them buy their tears, and let not even their 
wailing be free. You may see, on the day of the capture and destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem by the Eomans, a doleful crowd assemble, withered 
hags and aged men, their bodies broken down with years and clothed 
in rags, showing by their appearance that the wrath of God is upon 
them. A crowd of unhappy wretches collect, and while the Lord's 
CVoss glitters and shines in the Church of His Resurrection, and the 
banner of the Cross also gleams from the Mount of Olives, the 
miserable people mourn over the ruins of their Temples .... and 
the (Roman) soldier demands pay from them for permission to weep 
longer. — (Migne, Patrologia Latina^ xxv, col. 1,354.) 

11. xi. Commentary on Isaiah vi, 11. — (Then said I, Lord, how 
long ?) And the Lord answered, The people shall not see, and shall 
not hear, and their heart shall be blinded, until Vespaaian and Titus 
shall fight against the cities of Judaea, and they shall be utterly des- 
troyed, so that not so much as their name shall remain, and what 
houses remain shall be without man, and the land be utterly desolate, 
and the Jewish people be scattered abroad throughout the who?e 

world by flight or captivity And when the land itself is laid 

waste .... a second time shall its ruins be ravaged when after about 
50 years Hadrian shall come, and shall utterly despoil the land of 
Judaea, so that it shall be as a teil tree, and as an oak that hath lost 
its acorns. Finally, after this last desolation the very rights of the 
nation have been done away, and the Jews have been forbidden to set 


foot upon the land fix)m which they have been cast out. — (Migne, 
Patrologia Latina, xxiv, cols. 100, 101.) 

11. xii. Chronicle. — a.d. 135. Barcochebas, the insurgent leader 
of the Jews, put to death with all kinds of tortures such Christians as 
would not help him against the Homan army. — (Migne, Patrologia 
LatinOy xxvii, cols. 619, 620.) 

11. xiii. Jbid.^ a.d. 136 — The Jewish war, which was waged in 
Palestine, came to an end, the Jews being utterly overthrown. 
Since that time they liave been forbidden even to enter Jerusalem, in 
the first place by God's will, and, secondly, by the decrees of the 
Romans.— (/6i'<f., cols. 619, ()20.) 

11. xiv. Commentary on Joeli^ 4. — We also read of 'the campaign 
of ^-Elius Hadrianus against the Jews ; he so utterly destroyed Jeru- 
salem and its walls that out of the ruins and ashes of the city he 
founded a new one called ^^lia, after his own name. — (Migne, Patro- 
logia Latina^ xxv, col. 952.) 

12. i. SuLricius Severus, Historiu Sa<ra, ii, 30. — "Titus is said, 
after calling a council, to have first deliberated whether he should 
destroy the Temple, a structure of such extraordinary work. For it 
seemed good to some that a sacred edifice, distinguished above all 
human achievements, ought not to be destroyed, inasmuch as, if pre- 
served, it would furnish an evidence of Roman moderation, but, if 
destroyed, would serve for a perpetual proof of Roman cruelty. But 
on the opposite side, others, and Titus himself, thought that the 
Temple ought specially to be overthrown, in order that the religion 
of the Jew^s and of the Christians might more thoroughly be sub- 
verted ; for that these religions, although contrary to each other, 
had nevertheless proceeded from the same authors ; that the 
Christians had sprung up from among the Jews ; and that, if the 
root were extirpated, the oft'shoot would speedily perish." — (Migne, 
Patrologia Latina^ xx, col. 146 ; translated in Nicene aiid Post-Nicene 
Fathers^ xi. p. 111. Supposed to have been taken from a lost book 
of Tacitus.) 

12. ii. Ibid., ii, 31. — At this time Hadrian, thinking that he 
would destroy the Christian faith by inflicting an injury upon the 
place, set up the images of demons, both in the Temple and in the 
place where the Lord sufl'ered. And because the Christians were 
thought principally to consist of Jews (for the Church at Jerusalem 
did not then have a priest except of the circumcision), he ordered a 
cohort of soldiers to keep constant guard, in order to prevent all 
Jews from approaching to Jerusalem. . . . Mark from among the 
Gentiles was then, first of all, bishop at Jerusalem. — (Migne, 
Patrologia Latina, xx, cols. 146, 147.) 


13. HiLARius, Treatise on Psalms Iviii, lix), No. 12. — The city was 
lost, the Temple was laid waste, and the Boman Emperor decreed that 
if they so much as came into the neighbourhood of the city, much 
more if they entered it, they should be starved to death. — (Migne, 
Patrologia Latina, ix, col. 381.) 

14. i. Chrtsostom. Oration, v, 10, Achersus Jttdceos, — ^Now let us 
call the facts themselves to bear witness to the truth of what has been 
said. If they had not attempted to build the Temple, they might 
have said, **If we had wished to attempt it, and to begin building, 
we should have been fully able to do so and should have accomplished 
it ! " But I now prove that they attempted to do so not once or twice 
but three times, and were hindered. ... 

14. ii. Ibid.^v, 11. — For after the desolation wrought by Vespasian 
and Titus, the Jews assembled together in the time of Hadrian and 
endeavoured to restore their state to its former condition. ... So 
they revolted against the Emperor, and rendered it necessary for him 
to lay the city waste a second time. He put them down^ and con- 
quered them, and then, lest they should have any grounds for future 
revolt, he cleared away all the ruins and set up his own statue there 
— (Migne, Patrologia Qrceca, xlviii, cols. 899, 900.) 

15. Georgius Cedrbnus, History — In his time the Jews became 
factious and tried to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, but he 
(Hadrian) was very wroth with them, and made war upon them, in 
which he slew 58 myriads of them in one day. He alsa destroyed 
the ancient ruins of the city and of the Temple and founded a new 
Jerusalem. — (Migne, Patrologia Qrceca, cxxi, col. 477.) 

16. NiCEPHORUS CALLI8TUS, Ecclesiastical History, iii^ 24. — It is 
stated that the Jews revolted a second time in the reign of this 
emperor (Hadrian), and that they intended to rebuild the Temple at 
Jerusalem. — (Migne, Patrologia Groeca, cxlv, col. 944.) 

17. P. Orosius, History, vii, 13. — By a final slaughter he (Hadrian) 
subdued the Jews, who, excited by remorse for their crimes, were 
laying waste what was once their own country of Palestine ; he al o 
avenged the Chiistians whom the Jews, led by Cotheba (Cocheba) ha 
tortured because they would not join them in their revolt against the 
Eomans. He also decreed that no Jew should be given leave to enter 
Jerusalem, that city being reserved for Christians alone. He also 
put it in an excellent posture by rebuilding the walls, and ordered 
it to be called ^lia after his own prsenomen. — (Migne, Patrologia 
Latina, xxxi, col. 1,093.) 

17. Paulus Diaconus, History, — Hadrian .... overthrew the Jews 
in a final defeat Jerusalem was laid waste for the la^ time, so 



that not one stone was left upon another, according to Divine prophecy, 
and he exalted the Christians. . . . — (Quoted by MUnter, The Jewith 

19. Stncellus. — And the war against them came to an end, for 
iit last Jerusalem was taken, so that not one stone was left upon 
another. — (Quoted by Migne, Patrclogia (?r(Bca, xxvii, col. 620.) 

20. SuiDAS V. — " The abomination of desolation " : Hadrian utterly 
destroyed the city. — (Quoted by Miinter, The Jewish War,) 

21. Abolfargius. — " In this year (the fourth of Hadrian's reign) 
there arose at Jerusalem a man named ben Ck)cab. When news 
of this was brought to Hadrian he sent an army thither who slew 
that man, stormed Jerusalem and overthrew the Jews ; and utterly 
destroyed the city of Jerusalem." So the Arabic text : the Syriac is 
not quite so precise : ** The Emperor sent an army which conquered 
the Jews, and after Jerusalem had been utterly destroyed . . . ." — 
(Quoted by Miinter, The Jeioish War.) 

22. Talmud or Jerusalem, Taamth, iv, 6 (6).— On the 9th Ab 
" Bethar was taken and the plough was passed over the ground of 
the capital." — (Translation of M. Schwab, tome vi, p. 184.) 

23. Maimontdes, in Bartolocci, BiUiothica Rabbinica, iii, p. 697. — 
"The impious Tyrannus Rufas of the kings of Idumaea (i.e., the 
Eomans) ploughed up the place of the Temple and its neighbourhood, 
that the prophecy of Jeremiah xxvi, 18, might be fulfilled." — (Quoted 
by Miinter, The Jeioish War.) 

24. Chronicon Paschale, a.d. 119. — In the time of these consuls 
the Jews revolted, and Hadrian went to Jerusalem. He took the Jews 
captive, went to the place called the Terebinth, and held an assembly 
[or " market."] 1 He sold them for slaves at the price of a horse 
per man. Those who were left he took to Gaza, and there held an 
assembly and sold them. That assembly is to this day called " Hadrian's 
Mart." He pulled down the temple (paos) of the Jews at Jerusalem 
and built the two Demosia, the theatre, the Trikameron, the Tetranym- 
phon, the Dodekapylon, formerly called Anabathmoi (the " Steps "), 
and the Kodra, and he divided the city into seven quarters, and 
appointed a head-man for each quarter, and each quarter is called by 
the name of its head-man to this day. He also gave his own name to 
the city and called it -^lia, seeing that he was named -^lius Hadrianus. 
— (Migne, Fatrologia Grceca^ xcii, cols. 613, 616.) 

^ r; iravqyvfHSf a general, or national assembly ^ a festal assembly in 
honour of a national god. Such festivals gave occasion for great markets 
or fairs (Liddell and Scott's Lexicon). 



Extracts from Greek and Latin Writers descriptive of 
THE Circumstances under which the Holy Sepulchre 


1. i. EusEBius, The Life of Constantine, iii, 25. — ^After these things* 
[the Emperor], beloved of God, undertook another memorable work in 
Palestine. ... It seemed to him to be a dotjc to make conspicuous, 
and an object of veneration to all, the most blessed place of the 
Saviour's resurrection in Jerusalem. And so forthwith he gave orders 
for the building of a house of prayer,* not having hit upon this project 
without the aid of God, but having been impelled to it in his spirit by 
the Saviour Himself. 

1. ii. Ihid.y iii, 26. — For ungodly men (or rather the whole race 
of demons' by their means) set themselves to consign to darkness 
and oblivion that divine monument of immortality* at which the 
angel who came down from heaven, radiant with light, rolled away the 

stone This cave of salvation* did certain ungodly and impious 

persons determine to hide from the eyes of men, foolishly imagining 
that they would in some such way as this conceal the truth. Having 
expended much labour in bringing in earth from outside,* they cover up 
the whole place ; and then, having raised this to a cei'tain height, and 
having paved it with stone, they entirely conceal the divine cave^ 
beneath a great mound. Next .... they prepare above ground a 
dreadful thing, a veritable sepulchre of souls, building to the impure 
demon, called Aphrodite, a gloomy shrine of lifeless idols,® and offering 

^ That is, after the conclusion of the Council of Nicsea. 

^ oIkOV €VK'flptOI', 

3 Or ** evil spirits.** 

^ riis diBavafflas fxvTifia. 

^ rb ffwrriplov hnpovy or " sacred cave." 

"* rb diiov &urpov, 

** yexputv tidwKwv ckStioj/ 'A<j>po^irris iLKO\d<rr((t ^aifxovi fiox'^^ oiKO^ofiriffd' 


M 2 


their foul oblations on profane and accursed altars. For in this way, 
only .... did they suppose that they would accomplish their purpose, 
even by concealing the cave of salvation > by means of these detestable 

abominations But . . . the machinations of ungodly and 

impious men against the truth continued for a long time ; no one of 
the governors, of the praetors, or even of the emperors, was found 
capable of abolishing these daring impieties, save only that one who 
was dear to God, the Euler of all. He being inspired by the Divine 
Spirit, could not bear to see the place we have been speaking of 
concealed through the artifices of adversaries of all kinds of impurity, 
and consigned to oblivion and neglect ; nor did he yield to the malice 
of those who had brought this about, but calling upon God to help 
him, he gave orders that the place should be purified, counting it 
especially fitting that a spot which had been polluted by his enemies 
should enjoy the mighty working of the All-good at his hands. And 
as soon as his orders were given, the contrivances of deceit were 
cast down fi*om on high to the ground, and the dwelling-places of 
error, images, and demons and all, were overthrown and utterly 

I. iii. Ibid, J iii, 27. — Nor did his zeal stop here. The Emperor 
further gave directions that the material of that which was destroyed, 
both wood and stone, should be removed and thrown as far from the 
spot as possible, which was done in accordance with his command. 
But only to go thus far did not satisfy him. Again, being inspired 
with holy^ zeal, he issued orders that, having dug up the soil to a 
considerable depth, they should transport, to a far-distant spot, the 
actual ground, earth and all, inasmuch as it had been polluted by the 
defilements of demon- worship. 

1. iv. Jbid., iii, 28. — This also was accomplished without delay. 
And as one layer after another was laid bare, the place which was 
beneath the earth appeared ; then forthwith, contrary to all expecta- 
tion, did the venerable and hallowed monument of our Saviour's 
resurrection' become visible, and the most holy cave^ received what 
was an exact emblem of his coming to life. For after its descent 
into darkness, it again came forth into light, and afforded to those 
who came to see, a clear insight into the history of the wonders 
which had there been wrought, testifying to the resurrection of the 
Saviour by deeds more eloquent than any voice could be. 

1. V. Ibid,y iii, 29. — These things being so done, forthwith the 

^ See note 6, p. 179. 

^ imOetdcasy or, having called upon God. 

^ rb , , , , Tfis ffuTiipiov avwrrdfftijjs fxaptipioy, 

* rb T€ &ytov r&y ayiwv livrpoy. 


Emperor .... gave orders that a house of prayer worthy of God 
should be erected round about the cave of salvation > on a scale 
of rich and imperial costliness. This project he had had for some 
time in view, and had foreseen, as if by superior intelligence, what 
was going to happen. To the govemoi's of the provinces in the 
East [he gave instructions] that .... they should make the work 
exceedingly large, great, and costly ; but to the Bishop who at 
that time presided over the Church in Jerusalem, he sent the 
following letter, in which he set forth the saving doctrine of the 
faith in clear language, writing thus : 

1. vi. Ihid.j iii, 30. — " So great is the grace of our Saviour, that no 
power of ]anguag;e seems worthy to describe the present wonder.' For 
that the token of that most holy passion,' long ago buried under ground, 
should have remained unknown for so many cycles of years, until it 
should shine forth to His servants now set free through the removal 
of him^ who was the common enemy of all, truly transcends all 
marvel. For if all who were reputed wise throughout all the world 
were to come together to one place and try to say something worthy 
of this event, they would not be able to match themselves against 
such a work in the smallest degeee, for the nature of this wonder as 
far transcends all capacity of man's reason as divine things surpass 
in permanence those which are human. Wherefore this is always my 
first and only object, that as the faithfulness of the truth displays 
itself daily by fresh wonders, so the souls of us all may become more 
zealous for the holy law ^ in all sobriety and earnestness with concord.* 
I desire then that you should especially be convinced of this (which, 
indeed, I suppose is plain to everyone), that of all things it is most 
my care how we may adorn with splendour of buildings that sacred 

^ a/jupi TO trun^ptov Avrpou. 

- The present wonder implies a previous wonder — the discovery of the 
Tomb (?). 

3 ro yvwpifffM Tov ayiwrdrov iK^lvov irdOovs. The token of the Passion is 
the Cross upon which Christ suffered, and not the Tomb in which He was 
buried. In Chaps. 25 to 28 Eusebius describes the recovery of the Tomb — 
the '* hallowed monument" of, or witness to, the resurrection (see note 1, 
p. 84). In Chap. 30 the Emperor first alludes to the Cross, which was 
certainly found in his reign (see p. 86), and probably at this time, and then 
explains his wish with regard to the Tomb. In Chaps. 81 and 32 he gives 
instructions for the construction of a basilica over the place where the 
Cross was found. 

^ Licinius, who died in a.d. 326, the year in which the Tomb was im- 

° That is, Christianity. 

^ The passage which follows refers to the Tomb. 


spot whicli, under divine directions, I relieved as it were from an 
incumbent load, even from the disgraceful adjunct of an idol — a place 
holy indeed from the beginning in God's judgment, but which has 
been made to appear still more holy since it brought to light the 
assurance of the Saviour's passion.^ 

1. viL Ibid.^ iii, 31. — " It is therefore fitting that your sagacity do 
so order and make provision for ever3rthing necessary, that not only 
shall this basilica^ be the finest in the world, but that the details also 
shall be such that all the fairest structures in every city may be 

surpassed by it Concerning the columns and marbles, 

whatever you shall judge, after the plan has been inspected,' to be 
most precious and most serviceable, be careful to inform us in writing, 
that those things .... which we learn from your letter to be needful 
may be procured from every quarter. For it is just that the place, 
which is more wonderful than the whole world,* should be worthily 

1. viii. Ihid.^ iii, 32. — " As to the roof of the basilica, I wish to 
know from you whether you think it should have a panelled ceiling 
or be finished in any other fashion. If it be panelled, it may also be 
ornamented with gold .... and you will also be careful to report 
forthwith to me, not only concerning the marbles and the columns, 
but also concerning the panelled ceiling if you should judge this the 
more beautiful." * 

1. ix. Ihid.^ iii, 33. — These things did the Emperor write, and his 
instructions were at once carried into effect. So on the monument of 
salvation itself* was the new Jerusalem built, over against' the one 
so famous of old Opposite this* the Emperor reared, 

* Tt)v rov fftvTriplov irdBovs iriffriv, i.e.j the Cross. The meaning appears 
to be that the tomb had been made more holy by the fact that its discovery 
had led to the finding of the Cross. 

2 A comparison of the details ordered by Constantine, with the descrip- 
tion of the work actually carried out in Chap. 36, leads to the belief that 
the basilica referred to is that whicli was built oTer the spot where the 
Cross was found. It is, however, possible that the Emperor intended to 
include all the holy places in one large Church, and that the decision to 
build two churches was only arrived at after inspection of the plan. 

^ ^e note 2. 

^ That is, the place where the Cross was found. 

^ The report of Macarius was evidently in favour of panelling, see 
Life of Constantine, Chap. 36. 

^ Kai 5j) Kar^ avrb rb ffwriipLov fiapr^pioy. The reference is probably to 
the Tombi 

' avri'Kp6<ranro5. 

8 That is old Jerusalem, the pite of the Temple. 


with rich and lavish expenditure, the trophy of the Saviour's victory 
over death.' Perhaps this was that strange and new Jerusalem pro- 
claimed in the oracles of the prophets,^ » And, first of all, 

he adorned the sacred cave,* which was, as it were, the chief ' part of 
the whole work, that divine monument at which once an angel, radiant 
with light, proclaimed to all the good news of regeneration manifested 
through the Saviour. 

1. X. Ihid.^ iii, 34. — This * first, as the chief part of the whole, the 
liberality of the Emperor beautified with choice columns and with 
much ornament, decorating it with all kinds of adornments. 

1. xi. /6ic?., iii, 36. — Next one crossed over to a very large space of 
ground, to wit, the atrium^ open to the pure air of heaven, the floor 
(rf which a stone pavement adorned, bounded by long porticos {stoce) 
which ran round continuously on three sides. 

1. xii. Ihid,y iii, 36. — For adjoining the side opposite the cave, 
which looked towards the rising sun, the basilica was erected,® an 
extraordinary work, reared to an immense height, and of great extent 

both in length and breadth but the inside (of the roof) 

was finished with carvings of panel work, and, like a great sea, ex- 
tended over the whole basilica in a series of connected compartments, 
and being overlaid throughout with radiant gold, it made the whole 
temple,^ as it were, to glitter with rays of light. 

1. xiii. Ihid,^ iii, 37. — . . . Three gates facing the rising sun were 
to admit the entering crowd. 

1. xiv. Ibid., iii, 38. — Opposite these « was the " hemisphere," ® the 

main point of the whole building, stretching out towards the roof of 

tlie basilica, which twelve columns suiTounded, equal in number to 

tlie Apostles of the Saviour, adorned on their summits with great 

l>owls of silver, which the Emperor gave 

1. XV. Ihid,^ iii, 39. — Then as people go towards the entrances which 

Hg in front of the temple, one comes upon an atrium. There were 

ii-^re on each side, first a court, then porticos {stoce) on each side, and 

J«t-stly the gates of the court. After these, in the midst of the wide 

^ riiv Kork ro» Bavdrov . ffoor-fipiov vlicriv 

^ Bef erring to Eev. xxi, 2. 

^ After alluding to the whole group of buildings, Eusebius here com- 
^aices to describe them in detail. 

* rb iepbv &inpov. 

* That is, the Tomb. 

* 6 fiatrlXeios ffwriicTo vkws. The basilica was built on the east side of 
3 tomb. 

** Toy TcJana vewv. 

® That is the three gates. 

^ rifua'<l>alpiov. 


niarket-place,^ the main entrance^ of the whole edifice of exquisite 
workmanship, presented to the passers-by on the outside a striking 
view of the interior. 

1. xvL Ibid,y Hi, 40. — ^This temple then did the Emperor raise as a 
conspicuous monument of the Saviour's resurrection.' 

1. xvii. Ibid.j iii, 41. — And having selected other places in the same 
region which were held in honour on account of two sacred caves/ he 
adorned them also with lavish expenditure ; rendering due honour to 
that cave which had been the scene of the first manifestation of the 
Saviour when He submitted to be bom in the flesh, and (in the case 
of the second) magnifying the memory of His ascension into heaven 
on the mountain-top. 

1. xviii. Ibid,, iii, 42. — So she (Helena) came, though advanced in 
years, with the energy of youth to acquaint herself with this land 
worthy of all veneration. 

1. xix. Ibid,, iii, 43. — And forthwith she dedicated two temples to 
the God whom she worshipped, one at the Cave of the Nativity, and 

the other on the Mount of the Asceosion Wher^Qre.the 

most pious Empress adorned the scene of the travail of the Mother of 
God with rare monuments, beautifying in every way this sacred 

Again, the imperial mother erected a stately edifice on the Mount 
of Olives as a monument of the progress into heaven of the Saviour of 
all, raising a sacred church and temple on the mountain ridge at the 
very summit of the hill. Here, in this cave, true history has it that 
the Saviour of all initiated His disciples into sacred mysteries. — 
(Migne, Patrologia Grceca, xx, cols. 1,085 sq, ; Translation in "The 
Churches of Constantine at Jerusalem," Palestine PUgrima^ Texts, 
vol. i.) 

1. XX. The Praise of Cooistantine, ix. — Again, in the province of 
Palestine, in that city which was once the seat of Hebrew sovereignty, 
on the very site of the Lord's Sepulchre,* he (Constantine) has raised 
a church of noble dimensions, and adorned a temple sacred to the 
salutary cross • with rich and lavish magnificence, honouring that 
everlasting monument,' and the trophies of the Saviour's victory over 

^ ayopa. 

^ irpoirvXaia* 

^ r6vB€ fikv ovv rbv v€mv ffwrripiov di/aoTcCo'ca/s ivapyks ^vlcrrri fxapnupioy 

■* Bvfflv Ayrpois fivtrriKois. 

^ rb trurfipiov fiapr^piov. 

^ vedtv T« &yiov rtp ffwrt\pit^ irrifieiip. 


the power of death, with a splendour which no language can describe. 
In the same country he discovered three places venerable as the locali- 
ties of three sacred caves; and these also he adorned with costly 
structures, paying a fitting tribute of reverence to the scene of the 
first manifestation of the Saviour's presence, while at the second cave 
he hallowed the remembrance of His final ascension from the mountain 
top, and celebrated His mighty conflict and the victory which crowned 
it at the third. All these places our Emperor thus adorned in the 
hope of proclaiming the symbol of redemption to all mankind — that 
Cross which has indeed repaid his pious zeaL — (Migne, Patrclogia 
Grceca^ xx, col. 1,369 ; Wace and Schafi^, Nic&iie and Poat-Nicene 
Fathers^ i, 594.) 

1. xxi. The Praise of Comtantine, xi, — ^The tluink offerings to thy 
guardian and Saviour, the trophies of the victory over Death, which 
have been set up in the houses of prayer and in the holy shrines, 
those lofty and exceeding beauteous royal masterpieces built by the 
royal will round about the memorial of our eternal salvation, is not 
their ^meaning plain to all men's understanding ? — (Migne, Patrologia 
Orosca^ xx, col. 1,376.) 

1. xxii. Commentary on Psalm Ixxxvii. — Anyone who considers 
what wondrous things have been done in our own time at the 
Sepulchre and the place of the Martyrdom* of the Saviour, will 
understand how these prophecies have indeed been fulfilled. — (Migne, 
Patrologia Oroeca^ xxiii, col. 1,064.) 

1. xxiii. Theophania. — The grave itself was a cave which had 
recently been hewn out ; a cave that had now been cut out in a 
rock,- and which had experienced (the reception of) no other body. 
For it was necessary that it, which was itself a wonder, should have 
the care of that Corpse only. For it is astonishing to see even this 
rock standing out erect and alone in a level land, and having only one 
cavern within it, lest, had there been many, the miracle of Him who 
overcame Death should have been obscured. Tlie Corpse was there- 
fore laid there, the Vessel of the living word ; and a great stone 
held (the entrance of) the cave. — (Lee's translation, p. 199.) 

N.B. — The Theophania is only extant in the Syriac version, and 

^ d/u^t TO fivfifia Kcu TO fiapTvpiov. 

^ The first part of the sentence refers, apparently, to the original condi- 
tion of the Tomb when newly cut out of the rock for Joseph of Arimathea, 
and the latter part to the Tomb after it had been isolated by hewing away 
the surroimding rock. The words used for " grave " and " cave " are the 
ordinary Syriac terms: — kahrd (=s Heb. keher. At. kabr), and m^'MM, 
which is also familiar in Hebrew and Arabic, and is evidently a translation 
of the Greek Avrpov. The word kSphd is used for *'rock," and is also 
employed to denote the " stone " which closed the cave. 


the meaning would be much clearer if the original Greek were in 
existence. The work was written after the Church of the Holy 
Sepulchre was built, or whilst it was in building, and the passage 
apparently alludes to the excavations by which the tomb was isolated, 
and to its appearance after isolation. Whether the meaning is that 
there was only one chamber or only one loculus or grave is uncertain — 
the former is most probable. 

2. i. SozoMEN, Historia Ecclesiasticay ii, 1. — After the Council of 
Nictea, the Emperor " directed that a house of prayer should be erected 
to God at Jerusalem, near the place called Calvary" {lit " the skull ").» 
At the same time his mother Helena repaired to the city for the pur- 
pose of offering up prayer and visiting the sacred places.'^ Her zeal for 
Christianity made her anxious to find the wood which had formed the 
adorable cross. But it was no easy matter to discover either this relic 
or the Lord's Sepulchre ; ^ for the Pagans who in former times had 
persecuted the Church, and who at the first promulgation of Christi- 
anity had had recourse to every artifice to exterminate it, had concealed 
that spot under much heaped up earth, and elevated what was before 
quite depressed as it looks now, and, the more effectually to conceal 
them, had enclosed the entire place of the resurrection and of Calvary* 
within a wall, and had, moreover, ornamented the whole locality and 
paved it with stone. They also erected a temple to Aphrodite, and 
set up a little image, so that those who repaired thither to worship 
Christ, would appear to bow the knee to Aphrodite, and that thus the 
true cause of offering worship in that spot would, in course of time, 
be forgotten, and that as Christians would not dare fearlessly to 
frequent the place, or to point it out to others, the temple and 
statue would come to be regarded as . exclusively appertaining to 
the Pagans. At length, however, the place was discovered, and the 
fraud about it, so zealously maintained, was detected ; some say that 
the facts were first disclosed by a Hebrew who dwelt in the East, and 
who derived his information from some documents which had come 
to him by paternal inheritance ; but it seems more accordant with 
truth to suppose that God revealed the fact by means of signs and 

dreams ; When, by command of the Emperor, the place 

was excavated deeply, the cave from whence our Lord arose from the 

^ afi'^i rbv KaXovfievov Kpavlov rSvoy, 

2 fe0oi**s rdrrovs. 

^ rov Btairta'lov Td<l>ov, 

* rbv rfjs iLvaardaeus x^P^^ *^^*- ^^^ Kpavlov, The last words are trans- 
lated Mount Calvary in Wace and Scliaff. I have omitted the ** Mount,'* 
for which there is no authority (see p. 13). 


dead was discovered,* and, at no great distance, three crosses were 
found and another separate piece Of wood, on which were inscribed 
in white letters in Hebrew, in Greek, and in Latin, the following 

words There was a certain lady of rank in Jerusalem who 

was afflicted with a most grievous and incurable disease ; Macarius, 
Bishop of Jerusalem, accompanied by the mother of the Emperor and 

her attendants, repaired to the bedside [After having been 

touched by the true cross, the lady recovers] 

2. ii. Ibid.<i ii, 2. — About this period the Emperor, having de- 
termined upon erecting a temple ^ in honour of God, charged the 
Governors to see that the work was executed in the most magnificent 
and costly manner possible. His nj other, Helena, also erected two 
temples, the one at Bethlehem near the cave * where Christ was bom, 
the other on ridges of the mount of Olives, whence He was taken up 
to heaven. 

2. iii. Ibid,^ ii, 26. — The temple called the great Martyrion which 
was built in the place of the skull * at Jerusalem, was completed about 

the thirtieth year of Constantine [After the Council of 

Tyre] .... when the Bishops arrived at Jerusalem, the temple was 
therefore consecrated. — (Wace and Schaff, Nicene and Post Nicene 
Fathers^ vol. ii.). 

3. i. Socrates, Historia Ecclesiastica, i. 17. — Helena, the Emperor's 
mother . . . being divinely directed by dreams, went to Jerusalem 

She sought carefully the Sepulchre of Christ,* from which He 

arose after His burial ; and, after much difficulty, by God's help 
recovered it ... . Those who embraced the Christian faith, after the 
period of His Passion, greatly venerated this tomb ; • but those who 
hated Christianity, having covered the spot with a mound of earth, 
erected on it a temple of Aphrodite, and set up her image there, not 
caring for the memory of the place. This succeeded for a long time, and 
it became known to the Emperor's mother. Accordingly, she, having 
caused the statue to be thrown down, the earth to be removed, and 
the ground entirely cleared, found three crosses in the Sepulchre ' 

With these was also found the tablet of Pilate 

Since, however, it was doubtful which was the cross they were in 
search of, the Emperor's mother was not a little distressed ; but from 

^ iv fi^pei TO TTjs dvaffrdtreus itpdvri avrpov, 

^ va6s. 

^ rb (rir4\Kaiov, 

** TC^pi rbv Kpaviov x***P^^' 

^ rb Tou Xpiffroii fiv^fia. 

"* rpeXs ivpiffKu aravpous tp rtp fiv^fiari. 


this trouble the Bishop of Jerusalem, Macarius, shortly relieved her^ 
And he solved the doubt by faith, for he sought a sign from Grod, 

and obtained it [Here foUows the story of the curing of the 

woman.] .... The Emperor's mother erected over the place of the 
Sepulchre a magnificent church, and named it New Jeru>9oJ.emj having 
built it facing » that old and deserted city. .... When the Emperor's 
mother had completed the New Jerusalem, she reared another church,, 
not at all inferior, over the cave at Bethlehem,- .... and built a 
third on the mount of the Ascension.' .... Her remains were 
conveyed to new Bome, the Capital. 

3. ii. Ibid,, i, 33. — Letters . . . were brought from the Emperor- 
directing those who composed the Synod to hasten to the Neio- 

Jerusalem^ having therefore immediately left Tyre, they 

set forward with all despatch to Jerusalem, where, after celebrating- 
a festival in connexion with the consecration of the place, they 
readmitted Arius .... 

3. iii. Ihid.^i ii^^.-^When Julian attempted to rebuild the Temple],. 
Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, called to mind the prophecy of Daniel,, 
which Christ also in the holy Grospels has confirmed, and predicted in 
the presence of many persons that the time had indeed come "in 
which one stone should not be left upon another in that temple," 
but that the Saviour's prophetic declaration should have its full 
accomplishment. — (Wace and Schaff, Nicene and Post'Nicene FatherSy 
vol. ii.) 


4. i. TnEODORET, Historia Ecclesiastical i, 15. — I will, however, 
add his (the Emperor's) noble acts with regard to the Sepulchre of our- 
Saviour.* For having learnt that the idolaters in their frantic rage 
had heaped earth over the Lord's tomb, eager thus to destroy all 
remembi'aace of His salvation, and had built over it a temple to the 
goddess of unbridled lust, in mockery of the Virgin's birth, the 
Emperor ordered the foul shrine to be demolished, and the soil polluted 
with abominable sacrifices to be carried away and thrown out far 
from the city, and a new temple of great size and beauty to bfr erected 
on the site. All this is clearly set forth in the letter which he wrote- 

to the President of the Church of Jerusalem, Macarius, 

The following is the letter. 

4. ii. /6iV7., i, 16. — The letter is that given by Eusebius {Life oj- 
C(yiistantine^ iii, 30-32, see p. 181). 

^ avTiTrp6<rojirov. 

" iv rtfi dvTptft rtis BfidKehjj.. 

^ iv T(p opct rrjs ivaA^i^cws. 

^ r^ ircpc rdv fftar'fipiov avnp Td(f>ov KarupOwfiiva. 


4. iii. Ihid,^ i, 17.— The bearer of these letters was no less illustrious 

a personage than the mother of the Emperor She did not 

shrink from the fatigue of the journey on account of her extreme old 
age, but undertook it a little before her death, which occurred in her 
eightieth year. 

When the Empress beheld the place where the Saviour suffered, 
she immediately ordered the idolatrous temple which had been there 
erected to be destroyed, and the very earth on which it stood to be 
removed. When the Tomb, which had been so long concealed, was 
discovered, three crosses were seen buried near the Lord's sepulchre.* 
[Macarius identifies the true Cross by touching and healing a noble 
lady with it. Helena ordered some of the nails to be placed in the 
royal helmet, and the remainder in the bridle of the Emperor's horse. 
Part of the cross was taken to the palace, and the remaining portion 
was committed to the care of the bishop of the city.] — (Migne, Patro- 
logia Grceca^ Ixxxii, cols. 955-958 ; Wace and Schaff, Nicene and Post- 
NiceTie Fathers, voL iii.) 

5. i. Alexander Monachus, De inventione Sanctce Crucis, — 
Now, after the Lord had ascended into heaven, and exceeding great 
miracles were wrought in His name by the holy apostles, the high 
priests were again filled with rage, saying : " What shall we do to 
these men? for that indeed signs and wonders have been wrought 
by the disciples of Jesus in His mfae is manifest to all, and we cannot 
deny it. But that it spread not to futiu'e generations, come, let us 
hide the place of his sepulture.^ For if the people see the sepulchre 
empty, they will all believe on him." Then they ordered the sepulchre 
and the place of the skull,' in which the Holy Cross had stood, to be 
covered over, endeavouring to cast these proofs of salvation into 
oblivion. This was the most wicked plan of the Jews. Howbeit, 
God suffered all this to be done by them, while in the meanwhile He 
wisely ordained that which should come to pass ; for seeing that the 
city was soon to be laid waste and burned with fire, God permitted 
the life giving wood (of the Cross) and the site of the glorious Eesur- 
rection to be hidden for a little while, lest during such great disorder 
these places should be burned by either Jew or Gentile : this glory 
was in due time to be revealed. — (Migne, Patrologia Grceca, Ixxxvii, 
par. 3, col. 4,038.) 

5. ii. Ibid, — Meanwhile the holy church established at .^ia, being 
of the Gkntiles, appointed the first Gentile Bishop, one Marcus. .... 

^ Topcb TO fivfjfjM rb AanroriKbv. 

^ rbv r6irov rfjs ra<l>fjs ainov, 

^ rby rdfbov Kal rbv r6vQV tow xpaylov. 


Now the Empress Helena, when she liad built her costly church 
on the site of the Resurrection, and of the Skull,^. in such a fashion 
as to be second to none either in size or beauty, gave the church 
the name of New Jerusalem, as being the antitype of the old and 
destroyed Tabernacle. — (Migne, Patrologia Orceca, cxlvi, cols. Ill, 112.) 

10. Ambrose, ComraeiUary on Psalm xlviii, — ^The mountains are 
round about her (Jerusalem) : among them is the Church of €k)d, 
which is the City of the Great King. Moreover, according to the 
map, the Lord suffered in the Vetierariumy which was a place on the 
north side. There is the Mount Sion, tliere is Jerusalem, which is on 
the earth. — fMigne, Patrologui Lathiay xv, col. 1,148.) 

11. L SuLPicius Se\'erus, Ilistoria Sacra^ ii, 31. — At this time 
Hadrian, thinking that lie would destroy the Christian faith by 
inflicting an injury upon the place, set up the images of demons, both 
in the temple and in the place where the Lord suffered. And because 
the Christians were thought principally to consist of Jews (for the 
•churches at Jerusalem did not then have a priest except of the cir- 
<;umcision), lie ordered a cohort of soldiers to keep constant guard in 
order to prevent all Jews from approaching Jerusalem. .... Mark, 
from among the Gentiles, was then, first of all. Bishop at Jerusalem. 

11. ii. Ibid,f ii, 33. — Jerusalem, which had presented a horrible mass 
of ruins, was then- adorned with most numerous and magnificent 
<2hurches. And Helena .... having a strong desire to behold 
Jerusalem, cast down the idols and the temples which were found 
there ; and in course of time, through the exercise of her royal 
powers, she erected churches on the sites of the Lord's passion, 
resurrection, and ascension.' [Severus, in explanation of the opening 
in the roof of the Church of the Ascension, says that the spot 
imprinted with the Lord's footsteps, threw back the blocks of marble 
in the faces of those who tried to place them.] 

1 1. iii. Ibid,^ ii, 34. — Through the kind efforts of the same queen, the 
•Cross of the Lord was then found ... it had been covered over by 
the rubbish of the ruined city .... Helena, having first got infor- 
mation about the place of our Lord's passion, caused a band of soldiers 
to be brought up to it, while the whole multitude of the inhabitants 
of the locality vied with each other in seeking to gratify the desires of 
the queen, and ordered the earth to be dug up, and all the adjacent 
most extensive ruins to be cleared out. Ere long, as a reward of her 

^ Kai rov Kpoa/iov, ' In the reign of Constantine. 

^ Bctsilicas in loco Dominicce passioniSf et resurrecHoniSy et ascensionis 


faith and labour, three crosses .... were discovered. But upon this, 
the greater diflficulty of distinguishing the gibbet on which the Lord 
had hung disturbed the minds and thoughts of all, lest by a mistake, 
likely enough to be committed by mere mortals, they might perhaps 
consecrate as the Cross of the Lord that which belonged to one of the 
robbers. They form then the plan of placing one who had recently 
died in contact with the crosses. Nor is there any delay in carrying 
out this purpose ; for, just as if by the appointment of God, the 
funeral of a dead man was then being conducted with the usual 
ceremonies, and all rushing up took the body from the bier. It was 
applied in vain to the first two crosses ; but when it touched that of 
Christ, wonderful to tell, while all stood trembling, the dead body was 
shaken off, and stood in the midst of those looking at it. The Cross 
was thus discovered, and was consecrated with all due ceremony. — 
(Migne, Patrologia Latina, xx, cols. 146-148 ; Wace and Schaff, Nicene 
and Po8t-Nicene Fathers^ vol. xi.) 

12. i. EuFiNUS, Historia Ecclesiastica, ix, 6. — If still any doubt, I 
will bring forward the evidence of the place itself where this was 
done. The place itself in Jerusalem bears witness to this, and the rock 
of Golgotha* which was rent beneath the burden of the Cross. So 
does also that cave ^ which, when the gates of hell were burst, restored 
His body to life, that being purified it might ascend from thence into 
Heaven. — (Auctores Historice Ecclesiaaticciey p. 104. Bilduis.) 

12. ii. Ihid.^ x, 7. — " Concerning Helena, Constantine's mother." 
About the same time, Helena, Constantine's mother, a woman of 
surpassing faith and religious feeling, and of remarkable munificence, 
whose son Constantine truly was, and was acknowledged to be 
moved by divine visions, went to Jerusalem and there enquired of 
the inhabitants after the place where the sacred body of Christ had 
hung upon the cross. This place was hard to find, because an image 
of Venus had been set up there by the ancient persecutors, in order 
that if any Christian came to the spot, wishing to worship Christ, he 
might appear to be worshipping Venus. Because of this the place 
was unfrequented and almost forgotten : but when, as aforesaid, this 
pious lady hastened to the spot which had been pointed out to her 
by signs from heaven, she cleared away from it all profane pollution, 
dug deep down into its foundations, and there found three crosses 
lying in irregular order. — (Migne, Patrologia Latina^ xxi, cols. 475, 476.) 

13. i. Jerome, Epistola ad Pavlinum (circa a.J), 396). — Access to the 
courts of heaven is as easy from Britain as it is from Jerusalem, for 

^ Golgothana rupes. '^ Antrum, 



" the kingdom of God is within you " (Luke xvii, 21). Antony and 
the hosts of monks who are in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Pontus, Cappa- 
docia, and Armenia, have never seen Jerusalem ; and the door of 
Paradise is open for them at a distance from it. The blessed Hilarion, 
though a native and a dweller in Palestine, only set eyes on Jerusalem 
for a single day, not wishing, on the one hand, when he was so near, 
to neglect the holy places, nor yet, on the other, to appear to confine 
God within local limits. From the time of Hadrian to the reign of 
Constantine — a period of about one hundred and eighty years — 
the spot which had witnessed the resurrection was occupied by a 
figure of Jupiter, while on the rock where the cross had stood, a 
marble statue of Venus was set up by the heathen and became an 
object of worship. The original persecutors, indeed, supposed that by 
polluting our holy places they would deprive us of our faith in the 

passion and the resurrection. Even my own Bethlehem 

was overshadowed by a grove of Tammuz, that is of Adonis, and in 
the very cave where the infant Christ had uttered His earliest cry, 
lamentation was made for the paramour of Venus. — (Migne, Patrologia 
Latina^ xxii, col. 581 ; Wace and Schaff, Nicene and Poit-Nicene 
Fathers, vi, p. 120.) 

13. il Epistola ad RtLsticum,^ " De Poenitentia." — Thou wanderest in 
thy country, yet not in thy country, for thou hast lost thy country. 
Yet it remembers thy name in the venerable places of the Kesurrection, 
and Crucifixion, and cradle of our Lord and Saviour, when he wept as 
a little child, and it draws thee to itself by prayers, to the end that 
if not by thy own deserts, at all events by its faith, thou mayest be 
saved. — (Migne, ibid., xxii, col. 1,046.) 

13. iii. Epistola FavXce et Euatochii ad Marcellam. — §8. If, after the 
Passion of our Lord this place is accursed, as the wicked say that it 
is, what did St. Paul mean by hastening (Acts xx, 16) to Jerusalem 

that he might keep the day of Pentecost there % § 9. It would 

be a long task to mention, year by year, from the Ascension of our 
Lord to the present day, how many bishops, how many martyrs, how 
many men eloquent in ecclesiastical learning have come to Jerusalem, 
thinking themselves to be lacking in religion and in learning, and not 
to have received, as the saying is, a full handful of virtues unless they 
had adored Christ in those very places from which the Gospel first 

shone forth from the Cross § 10. What we especially 

assert is this, that those who are the foremost men of the whole 

earth, all alike, flock hither together. § 12 When will that 

day come when we shall be able to enter the grotto * of our Saviour ? 
to weep with our sister and our mother in the sepulchre of the Lord. 

^ Written about A.D. 408. ^ Speluncam, 


Afterwards to kiss the wood of the Cross . • . . . — (Migne, Patrologia 
Latina^ xxii, cols. 489, 491.) 

14. i. St. Paulinus Nolanus, Epistola^ xxxi, Ad Severum. — 
§ 3. We may easily imagine with what violence those who persecuted 
the place where the cross stood would have cut down the cross itself if 
they had seen it standing. For the Emperor Hadrian, imagining that 
he would kill the Christian faith by defacing the place, consecrated 
an image of Jupiter on the site of the passion, and Bethlehem was 
profaned by a temple of Adonis, to the end that, as it were, the very 
root and foundation of the Church might be taken away, if idols were 
worshipped in the places wherein Christ was bom, that He might 
suffer ; suffered, that He might rise again ... on the spot where the 
shepherds did homage to tlie new bom Saviour on the glorious night 
when they sang for joy together with a multitude of the heavenly 
host, there a mixed company of harlots and eunuchs wailed for 
Venus's darling .... where the infant Saviour wailed as a child, 
there they celebrated their unholy ritea, mimicking the lamf'ntations 
of Venus for her lover ; where the Virgin bore a son, adulterers were 
worshipped. § 4. ... and the Empress Helena, with all the ex- 
penditure and taste which she could command, and which religion 
urged, her to employ, built churches and covered and adorned all the 
places wherein the Lord Our Kedeeraer fulfilled the saving mysteries 
of our salvation by the sacraments of His Piety, His Incarnation, His 
Passion, Eesurrection, and Ascension.-^(Migne, Patrologia Latinay 

Ixi, cols. 326, 327, 328.) 


15. St. Gregory, Bishop of Tours, Ecclesiastical.. History of France^ 
lib. i, ch. 34. — This Constantine, in the twentieth year of his reign, 
put his son Crispus to death by poison and his wife Fausta by a hot 
bath, because they had conspired against him. At this time the 
venerable wood of our Lord's Cross was discovered bv the researches 
of his mother Helena, having been pointed out to her by the Jew 
Juda, who after his baptism was called Quiriacus. — (Migne, Patrologia 
Latina, Ixxi, col. 179.) 

16. i. Cyril, Catechetical Lectures, xiii, 35. — But we seek to be told 
plainly where he was buried. Is his tomb * then made with hands ? 
Is it like the tombs of kings, raised above the ground? Is the 
sepulchre 2 made of stones joined together, and what is laid upon it ? 
Tell us, O Prophets, the exact truth concerning his tomb,» also where 
it is placed and where we shall seek it ? And they say. Look unto the 

^ 6 T(i<f)os. ^ rb fivrifia. ^ 6 rdipos. 

N 2 


solid rock which you have known. Look cmd behold (Is. li, 1 ; Ecchis. ii, 

11) What kind of door* has the sepulchre? Again, another 

prophet says, They cut off my life in the dungeon^ and cast a stone - 
upon me (Lam. xxiii, 63). — (Migne, Patrologia Qrasca^ xxxiii, col. 813.) 

16. ii. Cyril, Catechetical Lectures, xiv, 6. — ^And wouldst thou know 

the place also ? For though it be now adorned, and that most 

excellently, with royal gifts, yet it was before a garden, and the tokens 
and traces thereof remain. — {Ibid,, col. 829.) 

16. iii. Ibid,, xiv, 9. — ^And whence did the Saviour arise ? He says, 
in the Song of Songs, Rise up, my love^ and come away (Cant ii, 10) ; 
and afterwards, in the cleft (cave) of the rock ; • for the cleft {cave) of the 
rock he calls the cleft (cave) which was then at the door of the salutary 
sepulchre,* and was hewn out of the rock itself, as it is customary 
here in front of sepulchres. For now it appears not, the outer cave * 
having been hewn away for the sake of the present adornment, 
for, before the sepulchre was decorated by royal zeal, there was a 
cave in the face of the rock.* But where is the rock which has in it 
this cleft ' (cave) ? Lies it in the midst of the city, or near the walls 
and the outskirts ? and is it in the ancient walls, or in the outer walls 
which were built afterwards ? He says then in the Canticles (ii, 14), 
in^the cleft (cave) of the rock near the outer wall.^ — (Ibid,, col. 833 ; 
Pusey, Library of the Fathers, Cyril's " Catechetical Lectures.") 

* >/ Bvpa, 


^ 'Ev ffKB'Try Ttis vsrpas, 

■* irpo rfjs dvpas tov aivTripiov /xytfiaToSm 

'^ rb TcpoffKivafffia, 

^ ffKiini TJV ^flTTpOffOtV T^S VBTpaS, 

^ Kai v6Tfpov iv Toiis apxaiois, riix^ffiv iffriVy ij ToXs xitrrtpov yevofdvois 
vpoTtixiirfiafft; Atyci roivov iv rciis 'Acfiaffiv* *Ev (TKEtry ttjs vkrpas, 



Eeferences to the Tomb and Cross by Eusebius and 


The question whether Eusebius alludes to the Cross in his writings 
cannot certainly be answered. It has been argued that his words are 
qui|;e as applicable to the Holy Sepulchre as, or even more so than, 
to the Cross. If, however, the statement of Cyril that the Cross was 
found in the reign of Constantine be coiTect, the absence of any 
allusion to it by Eusebius is almost inexplicable. Eusebius certainly 
mentions a church at Jerusalem '^ sacred to the salutary sign," z.e., 
the Cross ; and it may not unreasonably be inferred that when Cyril 
calls the Cross "the trophy of the victory over death," and "the 
salutary trophy of Jesus," he uses expressions which had the same 
meaning and application in the time of Eusebius. An attempt is 
made below to make a distinction between the expressions which 
refer to the Cross and those which are applied to the Tomb. 

1. Eeferences to the Cross by Eusebius and Cyril : — 

EcclesiasticdL History^ ix, 9. — rov a-oTrjpiov rpnircuov ndBovs, a trophy 

of the Saviour's Passion. 
Life of Constantine, i, 40. — fitya rpoiraiov rovri, this great trophy. 
The Praise of Constantine, ix. — rov fieyoKov 2(arrjpog ra Korii tow 

Bavarov rpoTrata, the trophies of the Saviour's victory over the 

power of death. 
Ibid., xi. — rpoircuare rrj£ Kara rov Bavarov viiajs, tlie trophies of the 

victory over death. 
J^if^ of Constantine, iii, 30. — ro yuupta-fia rov ayiardrov tKetpov 

TToBovs, the token of that most holy Passion. 
Ibid., iii, 33. — T171/ Karh rov Bavarov a<orrfpiov viiajv, the trophy of 

the Saviour's victory over death. 
Ibid., iii, 30. — rfjv rov a-onrrjpiov irdBovs witrrtv, the assurance of the 

Lord's Passion. 
EcclesiasticaZ History, ix, 9. — ro aarrjpiov rov aravpov tnnkuov, the 

salutary sign of the Cross. 
Ibid., ix, 9. — ro aoyniptov arjfJLtiov, the salutary sign (also in Life 

of Constantine, i, 40). 


The Praise of Catistantine, ix. — vecav t€ dyiov r^ a-onTrjpitp oTjfjLtup, 

a church sacred to the salutary sign, 
Cyril, Ad Constantiusj iii. — t6 rrjs Kara tov Bavdrov vIkjjs rpdwcuov, 

the trophy of the victory over death. 
Cyril, Catechetical Lectures^ xiii, 40. — t6 rpovaiov ^Irjaov to <roiyrrjpiov, 

6 aravpos, the salutary trophy of Jesus — the Cross. 

2. Keferences to the Tomb : — 

Life of Catistantiiie^ iii, 26. — r^r dBavaaias fivrjfia^ a monument of 

Ihid,^ iii, 33. — fivrjpM iK^ivo B€<rrri(nov^ that diviue monument^ cj, 

that everlasting monument in The Praise of Constantine^ ix. 
Ihid.^ iv, 33. — dpxfn rov (ronrrfpiov p.pfifjLaTos Xoyor, oration on the 

monument of the Saviour. 
Ibid., iii, 26. — t6 aorrrfpiov avrpov^ the salutary cave ; also in iii, 29, 

iv, 46 — TO Btiov avTpoVy the divine cave, 
/bid., iii, 28. — to t€ &yiov tS^v ay'nov avTpop, the most holy cave, 
fbid., iii, 33. — to Upov avTpov, the sacred cave. 
Ibid., iii, 36. — to tvrrpov, the cave, also in The Praise of Con- 

stantine, ix. 
Ibid., iii, 2S. — to Tr^s a&Trjpiov dvaoTdaeas p,apTvpiov, the 

testimony (or monument) of the Saviour's resurrection ; Ttfv tov 

^ciTTJpos dvdaTaaip paprvpovptvov, a testimony to the resurrection 

of the Saviour. 
Ibid., iii, 33. — to acDTrjpiov papTvpiov, the salutary testimony, also in 

The Praise of Constantine, ix. 
Ibid., iii, S5. — tov ttjs aonTriplov dvaoTdaecas pMeapitrTOTaTov tottov, 

the most blessed place of the Saviour's resurrection. 
/ bid.f iii, 30. — toi' Icpbp iKtivov tottov, that sacred place (or spot). 

Cyril uses the words to pvTJpoj to papTvpiovy 6 ronos, and 6 Td<l}os. 



General Gordon's Views with regard to the Position 
. . of Golgotha. 

General Gordon's views are contained in a signed article in the 
Qwx/rterly Statement for 1885 (pp. ,79 sqq.) ; in Reflections in Palestine 
(pp. vii, 2-17), and in private letters. He maintained that the Temple 
ought to have been built on the knoll above "Jeremiah's Grotto," 
which he called " Skull Hill," but that the builders, the Jews, rejected 
that rock, or stone, and erected the building further south, on the 
knoll, or rock, within the Har^m esh-Sherlf — that is, at the spot where 
the Dome of the Rock now stands.^ Nevertheless, by Divine provi- 
dence, the stone which was refused or rejected by the builders became 
the head corner-stone (1 Peter ii, 7) * through the crucifixion of Christ 
upon it (Ephes. ii, 20). The cross was erected on the top, and in the 
centre of "Skull Hill," and its outstretched arms embraced "the 
whole city, and even the Mount of Olives." * The women stood on 
the subsidiary knoll, south-east of the cross. From an explanatory 
diagram (Fig. 11), in a private letter. General Gordon appears to have 
believed that the churches of Constantine were near " Skull Hill." He 
writes : " I have still a strong opinion that we sliall find the Con- 
stantine sepulchre* is close to St. Stephen's Church, outside the 
Damascus Gate, where the cisterns are." 

^ Rabbi Schwarz quotes from Sehhachim, 546 : " It was afc first the 
intention to build the Temple on the En Etam (mount) which overlooks 
Mount Moriah, but in the end the lower Mount Moriah was selected." The 
Rabbi, however, identified En Etam with a height west of the city, " which 
would have been a very proper place fOr the erection of the Temple, since 
it overlooks Sion, but, as the Talmud states, there were other important 
reasons for. building it on the lower Mount Moriah." — {Das heilige Land^ 
p. 228.) 

^ " The word is one which denotes two walls, and, meaning the union of 
Jews and Gentiles, it is called the Head Comer-stone." — (Private letter.) 

^ Reflections in Falestine, p. 3, and diagram in (Quarterly Statement, 
1885, p. 80. 

* Apparently that known as " Q-ordon*8," or the " Garden " tomb (No. 2 
on Fig. 6, p. 108). General Gordon visited this tomb but makes no direct 
reference to it. 


Greneral Gordon also held what he calls " a more fanciful view." 
This was that : — 

" The mention of the place of the Skull in each of the four Gospels 

18 a call to attention If the skull is mentioned four -times one 

naturally looks for the body, and if you take Warren's or others* 
contours, with the earth or rubbish removed, showing the natural 
state of the land, you cannot help seeing that there is a body,^ that 
Schick's conduit * is the oesophagus, that the quarries " are the chest, 

and if you are venturesome you will carry out the analogy further 

Now the Church of Christ is made up of, or came from. His pleura, 
the stones of the Temple came from the quarries, from chest of figure, 
and so on ; so that fixed the figure of body to the skull.* " 

Fig. 11.—" Skull Hill " and Churches. 
1. Holy Sepulchre. 2. Church Virgins. 3. Crucifixion. 4. Martyrdom. 

The idea that the " sacred eastern hill " bore a "rough resemblance 
to the human form " appears to have been fixed in General Gordon's 
mind. He " illustrated " it by a curious drawing * (Fig.J12), and in his 
Reflections (p. 8) he wrote : " From the Skull Hill, on the nprth-north- 
west, the body lies — as did that of the victim — aslant or askew to the 
altar of burnt sacrifice." 

^ " Warren's plan of Jerusalem in The Temple and the Tomb (p. 33) 
showa very clearly the human figure, and only wants the skull hill to be 
considered with it to complete it" (Reflections in FaUstine, p. vii). The 
resemblance is not very apparent. 

2 C E on Fig. 6, p. 108. 3 See Fig. 6, p. 108, and Fig. 7, p. 110. 

"* Quctrterly Statement^ 1885, pp. 79, 80. General Gordon also held 
that the Gihon of Gen. ii^ 13, had its source in Jeremiah's Grotto. It 
dried up after the Deluge, but will flow again, as prophesied by Ezekiel 
(xlvii, 1-6) : running at first as a rill through Schick's conduit (G E on plan), 
and then swelling, it will fill the Kidron Valley and sweeten the Dead Sea. — 
(Private letters.) 

^ Beduced from a tracing of the original drawing in the possession of 
the late Dr. Schick. 



General Grordon's reasoiis for ideutifjing Golgotha with "Skull 
Hill " are thus stated : — 

*^ I went to the Skull Hill, and felt convinced that it must be north 
of the altar. Leviticus i, 11, says that the victims are to be slain on 
the side of the altar northwards (literally to be slain slantwise or 
askew on the north of the altar).i If a particular direction was given 
by God about where the types were to be slain, it is a sure deduction 
that the prototype would be slain in the same position as to the altar ; 

this the Skull Hill fulfils The Latin Holy Sepulchre is west 

of the altar, and, therefore, unless the types are wrong, it should 
never have been taken as the site." {Quarterly Statement, 1885, p. 79.) 

The name Golgotha was not derived from any resemblance in 
relief, or profile, to a human skull, but from the form of the ground 
as represented by a contour* on the Ordnance Survey Plan of 
Jerusalem on the 2^00 scale. In a private letter General Gordon 
writes with reference to the alleged likeness to a human skull, " Skull 
with caves for eye sockets, that is all one would get, if one was 
foolish enough to write. I say it is the contour in a map of 1864." 
Elsewhere he refers to " Skull Hill " as " an apex of uncovered rock — 
a rocky knoll resembling in form the human skull " ; but there is at 
present no apex of uncovered rock or rocky knolL 

General Gordon's theory involves the view that ground, which 
for several centuries has been used as a Muhammadan burial place, 
has not altered since the Crucifixion. 

^ See also Reflections in Palestine, p. 3. The iDterpretaiion of Lev. i, 
11, is erroneous. The words mean that the victim was to be slain north and 
not north -north-west of the altar. Accordiiig to Jewish tradition the sin 
offeriogs, the burnt offerings, and the trespass offerings in the Temple were 
slain on the north side of the great altar. 

^ The contour represents, rudely, the side view of a skull, or head, in 
plan (see Figs. 11 and 12). The form of the contour is temporary or 
accidental. It runs partly over rock but chiefly over made ground, and 
could not possibly have had the same form at the time of the Crucifixion. 



Dr. Eobinson's Views with regard to the Position of 
THE Third Wall of Jerusalem. 

Among those who have maintained that the third wall was to the 
.north of the present one is Dr. Robinson, the distinguished American, 
who was the first to apply the methods of scientific research to the 
exploi'ation of Palestine. He visited Jerusalem in 1838, before any 
buildings had been erected outside the city walls, and before any 
excavations had been made. His theory was based upon certain ruins 
which he saw on the surface of the ground and believed to be frag- 
ments of the Mirc? wall, built by King Agrippa, and his views must 
be tested by the additional information obtained during the last sixty 

Dr. Robinson wrote that, at a distance of 700 feet from the north- 
west comer of the city (N on Fig. 8, p. 126), " on the highest point of the 
ridge (which indeed is higher than that of Sion), there are traces of 
ancient sub-structures, apparently of towers or other fortifications, 
extending along the high ground for 660 feet further in the same 
direction." At the end of these ruins, 1,300 feet from the north-west 
corner (O on Fig. 8), he placed the tower Psephinus ; near where the 
east end of the Russian cathedral, since built, is located.^ 

In his note on the third wall he says,* "the conclusion is a 
probable one that the wall passed from Psephinus in an easterly or 
north-easterly direction to the brow of the Vplley pf Jehosaphat 
(t.e., Kidrou), and thence along that valley until it met the ancient 
wall coming up from the south on the east of the Temple." North- 
east of Psephinus (at T on Fig. 8) he noticed some " foundations which 
belonged very distinctly to the third wall," but beyond this point and 
along the brow of the Valley of Jehosaphat all search for traces of the 
wall was in vain. 

In 1864-65, during the progress of the Ordnance Survey, some 
steps were taken to test the accuracy of Dr. Robinson's theory. The 

^ Biblical Researches in Palest ine^ Vol. I., p. 458. 
2 Ibid., p. 465. 


ground was carefully examiued for traces of the assumed third wall, 
and excavations were made at the four points N, B, T, and U on its 
assumed course. At that time the Bussian cathedral, consulate, and 
hospice had recently been built, and, in reply to inquiry, it was stated 
that no ditch, and no masonry that could have formed part of a city 
wall or of a large castle, had been discovered within the limits of the 
Bussian property. The rock excavations were chiefly or wholly due 
to quarrying, and the ruins were such as would have been left by 
vineyard towers, or the walls of houses and gardens. 

Since 1865 the ground has been levelled, and there has been much 
building, but nothing has been found which supports Dr. Bobinson's 
view of the course of the third wall. Excavations made at N, T, U 
(see Fig. 8, p. 125) were sufiicieut to show that in neither case could the 
remains have formed part of a wall of defence.^ East of the point U, 
and along the brow of the Valley of Jehosaphat, a close search 
disclosed no trace of a wall. 

. Colonel Conder adopts Dr. Bobinson's view that the tower 
Psephinus was at or near the point O ; but thence he carries the wall 
eastward to the knoll W, where he places the " Women's Towers " of 
Josephus, and then southward to a point a few yards east of the 
Damascus Gate. From the last point he makes the third wall follow 
the line of the existing wall.'' 

The objection to this theory is that the projecting salient on the 
western hill has no relation to the defence of Bezetha, for which the 
third wall was built ; that it would have enclosed much unoccupied 
ground without any visible object, and that its existence cannot 
easily be reconciled with the description given by Josephus of the 
reconnaissance made by Titus before the siege commenced.* 

* The funds allotted for the Survey did not admit of excavation, but a 
small sum was given by the late Mr. James Fergusson for this purpose. 
^ Handbook to the Bible, p. 852 ; Quarterly Statement^ 1883, 77. 
^ Josephus, Wars, V., 2, § 2. 



Adam, the book of, 3. 

the burial of, at Hebron, 

referred to by Jerome, 5. 

legends respecting, 2, 8, 4, 

6, 95, 159. 

the tomb of, regarded as the 

centre of the earfh, 4, 162. 

^lia Capitolina, the city of, estab- 
lished by the Emperor Hadrian, 
55, 61, 146, 173, 177. 

coins of, 69. 

possible connection 

of name with Golgotha, 93. 

the centre of, from 

which distances were meaifared, 


the political con- 

stitution of, 62. 
the walls of, 146. 

Agrippa appointed king by the Em- 
peror Claudius, 50. 

the palace of, 27. 

the wall of, 113, 134. 

Alexander Monachus, 30, 64, 87, 89, 

.^exander, Bishop of Jerusalem, 68, 

Ambrose, 3, 14, 64, 162, 192. 
Amygdalon, the pool of, 129. 
Anastasis, the Basilica of the, 81, 

85, 97, 184, 188. 
Anastasius Sinaita, 3. 
Andreas, Archbishop of Crete, 4. 
Antonia, the castle of, 27, 31, 43, 

96, 128, 138. 
Aphrodite, the temple of, 63, 64, 

83, 94, 179, 187, 190. 
Apostolical constitutions, the, 4. 

Appian, 58, 168. 
Assyrians, the camp of the, 130. 
Astarte, the shrine of, 67. 
Athanasius, 2, 6, 159. 
Augustine, 3, 14, 164. 

Barclay, J. T., 1 18. 

Bar Kokba, the revolt of, 56. 

Basil of Cesarea, 2, 160. 

Seleucia, 3, 161. 

Bede, the Venerable, 7, 14, 166. 
Bernard the Wise, 14. 
Beth ha-Sekelah, 21, 110. 
Bezetha, 110, 112, 118, 132, 138, 141. 
Bliss, F. J., 62, 123, 127, 145. 
Bordeaux Pilgrim, the, 13, 38, 43. 

62, 148. 
Bovet, F., 9, 11, 77. 
BroTiary of Jerusalem, the, 14. 
Burchard of Mount Sion, 104. 
Burial, Jewish customs regarding, 72, 

Caiaphas, the House of, 38. 
Caignart de Saulcy, L. F. J., 49, 58. 
Calistus, N., 58, 177. 
Calvary, 7, 11, 14, 115, 119, 163, 164, 

Capital punishment, Jewish, 18. 

^i]2an, 21. 

Capitolium, the, 95. 
Caves, the Boyal, 114, 137, 141. 
Cedrenus, G., 58, 177. 
Chateaubriand, F. R. de, 45, 72. 
Christians, the treatment of, under 

the Roman Emperors, 60, 171, 176. 
Chrysostom, 3, 58, 161, 177. 
Church, the early Christian, at 

Jerusalem, 55, 59, 170, 172, 176. 


City, the Upiw, 52, 142. 14fi. 

City of Constantine, the walls of the, 

Codex Tlieodosianus, 80. 
CoDder, Colonel C, 10, 97, 102, 106, 

109, 118. 136, 140, 204. 
Constantine, the Emperor, 47, 69, 

80, 96, 147, 179. 
letter to 

Macarius, 82, 97, 181. 
Council House, the, 40. 
Cross, the discoTery and identifica- 
tion of the, 82, 88, 96, 104, 186, 

187, 189. 

the sign of the, 86. 

the wood of the, 87, 190. 

Crucifixion, as practised by the 

Bomans, 22. 
Cyprian, 3, 68, 161. 
Cyril of Jerusalem, 3, 4, 6, 12, 30, 

38, 43, 73, 81, 84, 87, 98, 100, 165, 

195, 197. 

Daniel, the Abbot, 21, 116. 

Dayid, the Tower of. 123, 124, 130, 

135, 148. 
Dawson, Sir J. W., 111. 
Dickie, A., 123, 145. 
Didymns Alexandrinus, 4. 
Dion Cassius, 56, 94, 168. 

Epiphanius, 2, 13, 30, 51, 54, 160, 

Erasmus, 7. 

Eucherius. 14. 38, 82, 147. 
Eusebius, 3, 30, 38, 47, 51, 55, 57, 

63, 65, 68, 76, 78, 80, 82, 90, 92, 

95, 170, 179, 197. 
Eutychius, 3, 147, 164. 
Execution, place of, at Jerusalem, 23. 
Bome and in 

Thessaly, 8. 

Fabri, Feiix, 106. 

Felix, Procurator of Judaea, 167. 

Fergupson, J., 45, 118. 

I Festus, Procurator of Judsea, 61, 167. 
Florus, Procurator of Judcea, 22 42 
I 167. ' ' 

: Fortification, principles of ancient, 
-. 121. 

Foundation, the Stone of, in the 

Temple, 6. 
Fr^jus (Odoricus de Foro Julii), 104. 
I Furrer, 44, 109, 136. 
Fuller, T., 8, 11. 
Fuller, the tomb of the, 139. 

Gkuineau, C. Clermont, 15, 43, 44, 

62, 100, 112, 136, 147. 
Garden Tomb, the, 111, 117. 
Gates of the Roman legionary camp, 

Genath, the gate, 130, 135, 136. 
Getbsemane, the garden of, 30, 37. 
Q^zer, the cemeteries of, 99. 
Gobat, Bishop, 34, 119. 
Gold^ Gate, the, 118. 
Golgi in Cyprus, 93. 
Gt)lgotha, origin of the name, 1. 
legend connecting it with 

a skull, 2, 159. 
resemblance to a skull, 11, 

12, 109. 

probable appearance of, 36. 

sources of information for 

fixing the site, 30. 

choice of the site for the 

crucifixion probably accidental, 33. 
Gt)rdon, General C. G., 12, 110, 199. 
Gregory Nazianzen, 12, 15. 
Grotto, the Cotton, 139. 
Guilielmus de Boldensele, 104. 
Guthe, 12, 17, 35, 44, 72, 82, 134. 

Hadrian, the Emperor, 17, 46, 56, 
61, 64, 66, 69, 90, 93, 95, 114, 146, 
148, 168, 171, 173, 174, 176, 178, 

founded the 

city ^lia on the site of Jerusalem. 


Hanauer, T. B., 19, 21, 99. 
Haraack, C. a. A., 75, 77, 151. 
Helena, the Empress, 87, 89, 97, 184, 

the Chapel of Saint, 184. 

Queen of Adiabene, the 

tombs of, 187, 189. 

Herod the Great, the palace of, 27, 
83, 41, 96, 120, 128. 

Agrippa, king of Judsea, 50. 

tlie palace of, 27, 


Hezekiah, the pool of, 129, 185. 

Hilarius, bishop of Poitiers, 4, 177. 

Hildebrand, J., 10. 

Hippicus, the tower, 127, 129, 142. 

Holy Sepulchre, the probable features 
of the site, 36, 100. 

arguments in favour 

of the authenticity of the tradi- 
tional site, 45. 

heathen temples on 

the site of, 46, 63, 179. 
attitude of th«5 early 

Christians with regard to, 72. 
identification of the 

site in the time of Constantino, 80, 

96, 179. 

discussion as to its 

position relative to the second 
wall, 97, 132. 
doubts with regard 

to the authenticity of the tradi- 
tional site, 103. 
conclusions as re- 

gards the authenticity of the 
traditional site, 120. 
Howe, Fisher, 11, 109. 

Jacques de Vitry, 104. 
Jaffa Gate, the, 119, 134, 141. 
Jebus, the defences of the city, 121. 
Jeremiah's grotto, 21, 109, 111, 112. 
Jerome, 2, 3, 5, 7, 13, 21, 38, 53, 58, 

59, 62, 64, 66, 78, 79, 83, 94, 162, 


Jerusalem, the topography of, 24. 

the history of, A.D. 33- 

A.D. 326, 49. 

the three walls of, 124. 

the legionary camp at. 

62, 142. 

the foundation of ^lia 

on the site of, 55, 61, 142, 168, 
173, 177, 178. 
the New, 84. 

Jews, treatment of, after the capture 
of Jerusalem by Titus, 64, 170, 

the revolt of the, under Bar 

Kokba, 56, 168, 174, 178. 

John, the High Priest, the monu- 
ment of, 100. 

Joseph of Arimathaea, the tomb of, 
9, 34, 73, 74, 101, 117. 

Josephus, 5, 16, 25, 27, 29, 40, 42, 
61, 52, 56, 112, 122, 124, 127, 137, 
139, 204. 

Juno, statue of, 62. 

Jupiter Capitolinus, temple of, at 
Jerusalem, 56, 62, 66, 70, 148. 

Justin Martyr, 1, 59, 169. 

Kasrel-JalM, 132. 
Kidron, Valley of, 24, 26. 
Kings, tombs of the, 101, 119, 140. 
Korte, Jonas, 46, 105. 

Lagrange, P., 21. 

Le Saige, Jacques, 104. 

Legion, camp of the Tenth, at Jeru- 
salem, 62, 142. 

Legionary fortress, usual sice oF, 

Macarius, 82, 88, 87, 89, 90, 92, 96, 

181, 190, 191. 
Madden, F. W., 49, 58, 69, 70. 
Madeba, the mosaic of, 28, 46, 118, 

Maimonides, 4, 19, 89, 59, 99, 166« 



Marcns Aurelius, the Emperor, 70. 
Marcus, Bishop of Jenisalem, 68, 

176, 189, 192. 
Mariamne, the tower, 127, 129, 142. 
Martyrion, the Basilica of the, 81, 

86, 97, 187, 191. 
If elito of Sardis, 78. 
MerriU, S., 111. 
Minerra, the statae of, 62. 
Monachos, Alexander, 87, 89, 189. 
Moriah, Mount, 25. 
Moses Bar Cepha, 3, 164. 
Mukaddasi, 145. 
Muristan, the, 145. 

Narcissus, Bishop of Jerusalem, 68. 

Nehemiah, the wall of, 121, 135. 

Nero, the Emperor, 50. 

Nerva, the Emperor, 66. 

Nicsea, the Council of, 76, 83, 96, 

179, 186, 191. 
Nicodemus, the tomh of, 99. 

OUtcs, the Mount of, 30, 37, 38, 172, 

184, 187. 
Origen, 2, 6, 68, 78, 159. 

Palace, the, of Herod the G-reat, 25, 

27, 31, 33, 41, 96, 127. 
Herod Agrippa, 27, 

Paschal Chronicle, the, 58, 178. 
Paulinus of Nola, 64, 66, 196. 
Pella, flight of the Christians to, 46, 

61, 173. 

return from, 47, 54, 76, 173. 

Phasffilus, the tower, 127, 129, 142. 

Philon of Byzantium, 121. 

Plessing, J. F., 8, 74, 106. 

Porta Judiciaria, 133, 135, 140. 

Prffitorium, the, 31, 41, 44. 

Procopius, 80, 

Procurators, Boman, of Judsea, 49, 

Psephinus, the tower, 29, 130, 136, 

137, 139, 

! Pudenziana, mosaic in Basilica of 
j St., 16. 

Quaresmius, F., 6, 15, 105. 
' Quarries, the Boyal, 114, 141, 



i Bamsaj, W. M., 69, 60. 

Keinach, T., 69, 70. 

Benan, J. E., 11, 33, 64, 106, 110. 

Boads, the ancient, of Jerusalem, 28. 

Eohinson, Dr. E., 64, 92, 107, 113, 
128, 141, 203. 

Bock, the Dome of the, 118. 

Boman camp, the walls of the, 142. 

Bufinus, 2, 14, 30, 64, 193. 

Sswulf, 104, 132, 135, 146. 
Sanhedrin, the hall of the, 31, 39. 
Schick, C, 17, 117, 131, 134, 136. 
Schiirer, E., 6, 40, 44. 
Sepp, Dr., 8, 43, 44, 93, 94. 
Siloam, the pool of, 127, 129. 
Simeon, son of Clopas, 46, 60, 170. 
Sion, the Mother Church of, 54, 146, 


the gate of, 107. 

Socrates, 3, 30, 64, 66, 80, 87, 187. 

Sophronius, 4. 

Sozomen, 3, 30, 63, 65, 80, 87, 89, 96, 

Spartianus, JSlius, 66, 169. 
Stoning, the Place of, 10, 113. 
Suchem, Ludolph yon, 104. 
Sulpicius Seyerus, 30, 64, 88, 176, 

Sylvia, St., 38, 82, 92. 
Syncellus, 68, 178. 

Taknud, the, of Babylon, 39, 40. 
Jerusalem, 7, 18, 

Taylor, Bishop Jeremy, 6, 7, 11. 
Tenth Legion, the camp of the, 62, 

Tertullian, 3, 14, 161, 169. 
Thenius, Otto, 11, 109. 


Theodoret, 3, 30, 87, 188. 
Theodosius, 14, 82. 
Theophttnes, 30, 82, 87, 191. 
Tomb, the, of Adam, 4, 159, 164. 
— - of Joseph of Arlmathsea, 9, 

34, 73, 74, 101, 117. 
of Nicodemus, 99. 

Tribute money, paid by the Jews, 56, 

71, 168. 
Tyche, the city goddess, 63, 70, 

Tyropoeon Valley, the, 25, 28, 128, 


Unger, P. W., 61, 72, 118. 

Vegetius, 121. 

Yeniis, the st-atue of, at Jerusaleui 

63, 64, 66, 193. 
Veronica, the House of, 134. 
Via Dolorosa, 33. 
VitruYius, 121. 

Wall, the first, of Jerusalem, 27, 126. 

second, of Jerusalem, 27. 

48, 97, 127. 

third, of Jerusalem, 27 

Wilbrand von Oldenberg, 104. 
Williams, »., 6, 45, 61, 107. 
Willibald, 14, 104. 

Habkibok and Soks, Printers in Ordinary to His Majesty, St. Martin's Lane. 


< I 


• i 



■ » 

; ' '